MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2343477107 · doi:10.4212/cjhp.v69i2.1537

Antipsychotic Drug Use and Screening for Delirium in Mechanically Ventilated Patients in Canadian Intensive Care Units: An Observational Study

2016· article· en· W2343477107 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Zoé Thiboutot, Marc M. Perreault, David Williamson, Louise Rose, Sangeeta Mehta, Melanie Guenette, Lisa Burry

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversitySt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonMount Sinai HospitalHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoMcGill University Health CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de MontréalUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeliriumMedicineAntipsychoticMechanical ventilationIntensive careSedationOdds ratioIntensive care unitEmergency medicinePsychomotor agitationIntensive care medicineAntipsychotic AgentAnesthesiaPsychiatryInternal medicineSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Background: Critically ill patients frequently experience delirium, and antipsychotic drugs are often used to manage symptoms. Objectives: To describe the use of antipsychotic drugs and delirium screening tools in mechanically ventilated, critically ill adult patients in Canadian intensive care units (ICUs) and to identify factors associated with the use of antipsychotic drugs. Methods: Pharmacists from 51 Canadian ICUs prospectively collected data on antipsychotic use and delirium screening in all patients for whom invasive mechanical ventilation was initiated during a chosen 2-week period occurring sometime in 2008 or 2009. Results: Data were collected for a total of 712 patients, of whom 115 (16.2%) received at least one dose of an antipsychotic. The antipsychotic prescribed, the total daily dose, and the administration schedule varied across sites. Delirium screening tools, validated for use in mechanically ventilated patients and endorsed by professional society guidelines, were part of routine care in a minority of ICUs (7/51 [13.7%]), and delirium screening was documented for few patients overall (41/712 patients [5.8%]). In a multivariable analysis, administration of antipsychotics was independently associated with longer duration of mechanical ventilation (odds ratio [OR] 1.12, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07–1.17), daily interruption of sedation (OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.01–2.90), and use of physical restraints (OR 2.15, 95% CI 1.27–3.65). Conclusion: A minority of mechanically ventilated patients in Canadian ICUs received antipsychotic drugs, and screening for delirium with validated tools was rare. Antipsychotic drug use was independently associated with longer duration of mechanical ventilation, daily interruption of sedation, and use of physical restraints. RÉSUMÉ Contexte : Les patients gravement malades souffrent fréquemment de délire, une affection dont les symptômes sont souvent traités à l’aide d’antipsychotiques. Objectifs : Dresser le portrait de l’utilisation des antipsychotiques et des outils de dépistage du délire chez les patients adultes gravement malades sous ventilation mécanique ayant séjourné dans une unité de soins intensifs (USI) canadienne et relever les facteurs associés à l’utilisation des antipsychotiques. Méthodes : Des pharmaciens de 51 USI canadiennes ont recueilli des données de façon prospective sur l’utilisation des antipsychotiques et sur le dépistage de cas de délire auprès de tous les patients placés sous ventilation mécanique effractive au cours d’une période de deux semaines entre 2008 et 2009. Résultats : Les données ont été recueillies chez un total de 712 patients. De ce nombre, 115 (16,2 %) ont reçu au moins une dose d’un antipsychotique. L’antipsychotique prescrit, la posologie quotidienne et l’horaire d’administration variaient d’un établissement à l’autre. Des outils de dépistage du délire (dont l’emploi est validé chez les patients sous ventilation mécanique et approuvé dans les lignes directrices d’associations professionnelles) ne faisaient partie des soins habituels que dans un petit nombre d’USI (7/51 [13,7 %]). De plus, les dépistages du délire n’ont été consignés que pour peu de patients dans l’ensemble (41/712 patients [5,8 %]). Au cours d’une analyse multivariable, on a associé indépendamment l’administration d’antipsychotiques à une durée accrue de la ventilation mécanique (risque relatif approché [RRA] de 1,12, intervalle de confiance [IC] à 95 % de 1,07–1,17), à une interruption quotidienne de la sédation (RRA de 1,71, IC à 95 % de 1,01–2,90) et à l’emploi de contention physique (RRA de 2,15, IC à 95 % de 1,27–3,65). Conclusions : Seul un petit nombre de patients sous ventilation mécanique ayant séjourné dans une USI canadienne ont reçu des antipsychotiques; de plus, des outils validés de dépistage du délire n’ont que rarement été employés. L’utilisation d’antipsychotiques a été indépendamment associée à une durée accrue de la ventilation mécanique, à l’interruption quotidienne de la sédation et à l’emploi de contention physique.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.176

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.006
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital PharmacySame topicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive DisordersFrench-language works237,207