MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2155047368

Gaps in patient care practices to prevent hospital-acquired delirium.

2009· article· en· W2155047368 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kannayiram Alagiakrishnan, Thomas J. Marrie, Darryl Rolfson, William Coke, Richard Camicioli, D’Arcy Duggan, Bonnie Launhardt, Bruce Fisher, Debbie Gordon, Marilou Hervas‐Malo, Bernice Magee, Cheryl A. Wiens

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsGlenrose Rehabilitation Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeliriumMedicineObservational studyEmergency medicineAltered Mental StatusProspective cohort studyMedical recordCognitive impairmentIntensive care medicinePediatricsCognitionInternal medicinePsychiatry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the current patient care practices that address the predisposing and precipitating factors contributing to the prevention of hospital-acquired delirium in the elderly. DESIGN: Prospective cohort (observational) study. PARTICIPANTS: Patients 65 years of age and older who were admitted to medical teaching units at the University of Alberta Hospital in Edmonton over a period of 7 months and who were at risk of delirium. SETTING: Medical teaching units at the University of Alberta. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Demographic data and information on predisposing factors for hospital-acquired delirium were obtained for all patients. Documented clinical practices that likely prevent common precipitants of delirium were also recorded. RESULTS: Of the 132 patients enrolled, 20 (15.2%) developed hospital-acquired delirium. At the time of admission several predisposing factors were not documented (eg, possible cognitive impairment 16 [12%], visual impairment 52 [39.4%], and functional status of activities of daily living 99 [75.0%]). Recorded precipitating factors included catheter use, screening for dehydration, and medications. Catheters were used in 35 (26.5%) patients, and fluid intake-and-output charting assessed dehydration in 57 (43.2%) patients. At the time of admission there was no documentation of hearing status in 69 (52.3%) patients and aspiration risk in 104 (78.8%) patients. After admission, reorientation measures were documented in only 16 (12.1%) patients. Although all patients had brief mental status evaluations performed once daily, this was not noted to occur twice daily (which would provide important information about fluctuation of mental status) and there was no formal attention span testing. In this study, hospital-acquired delirium was also associated with increased mortality (P < .004), increased length of stay (P < .007), and increased institutionalization (P < .027). CONCLUSION: Gaps were noted in patient care practices that might contribute to hospital-acquired delirium and also in measures to identify the development of delirium at an earlier stage. Effort should be made to educate health professionals to identify the predisposing and precipitating factors, and to screen for delirium. This might improve the prevention of delirium.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.926
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive DisordersFrench-language works237,207