ArticleBMJ open quality2026
Closing the gap in postoperative delirium detection: addressing low screening rates in the surgical recovery room.
Article in BMJ open quality, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Postoperative delirium (POD) is a common complication that increases the incidence of a variety of adverse patient outcomes. Routine screening of high-risk patients can mitigate these risks. This quality improvement (QI) project took place at Chelsea and Westminster Hospital using the Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycle methodology. The project aimed to implement a routine POD screening programme as recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE).The first cycle formalised a trust-wide guideline specific to perioperative delirium assessment. The second cycle made delirium tools easier to access on trust systems and embedded them into existing clinical workflows.The primary outcome of baseline and post-intervention POD screening rates was compared using Fisher's exact test. Screening rates for 246 high-risk POD patients (as defined by NICE guidelines) admitted to Chelsea and Westminster Hospital between January and May 2025 were included for analysis. The secondary outcomes were self-reported nursing measures (confidence in delirium screening and perceived guideline clarity). Pre- and post-intervention survey scores were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test. Post-intervention surveys were also used to assess the perceived long-term feasibility of interventions.POD screening rates increased from a baseline of 2.3% to 71.64% (p<0.0001) in the post-intervention period. Of those screened, 17.5% (n=11) of patients screened positive for POD. Reported confidence and clarity of guidelines increased (p<0.0001) to a median (IQR) of 10/10 (8.75-10). Long-term feasibility scores achieved a median (IQR) score of 9/10 (8-10).The formalisation of a delirium guideline and its integration with clinical workflows significantly increased screening rates and nursing confidence while detecting previously unrecognised cases of POD. This project's interventions can be adopted by trusts facing similar challenges. Limitations included the likelihood of observer bias, the use of a surrogate marker as a primary outcome and a small sample size, which limits the robustness of statistical analysis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.