A post cardiac surgery intervention to manage delirium involving families: a randomized pilot study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: As many delirium manifestations (e.g., hallucinations or fears) are linked to patients' experiences and personality traits, it is suggested that interventions should be tailored to optimize its management. The inclusion of family members, as part of an intervention, has recently emerged as a solution to developing individualised patient care, but has never been assessed in post-cardiac surgery intensive care unit where almost half of patients will present with delirium. AIMS: To assess the feasibility, acceptability and preliminary efficacy of an nursing intervention involving family caregivers (FC) in delirium management following cardiac surgery. DESIGN: A randomized pilot study. METHODS: A total of 30 patient/FC dyads were recruited and randomized to usual care (n = 14) or intervention (n = 16). The intervention was based on the Human Caring Theory, a mentoring model, and sources informing self-efficacy. It comprised seven planned encounters spread over 3 days between an intervention nurse and the FC, each including a 30-min visit at the patient's bedside. During this bedside visit, the FC used delirium management strategies, e.g. reorient the person with delirium. The primary indicator of acceptability was to obtain consent from 75% of approached FCs. The preliminary effect of the intervention on patient outcomes was assessed on (1) delirium severity using the Delirium Index, (2) occurrence of complications, such as falls, (3) length of postoperative hospital stay and (4) psycho-functional recovery using the Sickness Impact Profile. The preliminary effect on FC outcomes was assessed on FC anxiety and self-efficacy. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, ANCOVAs and logistic regressions. RESULTS: The primary indicator of obtaining consent from FC was achieved (77%). Of the 14 dyads, thirteen (93%) dyads received all seven encounters planned in the experimental intervention. Intervention group patients presented better psycho-functional recovery scores when compared with control group patients (p = 0·01). Mean delirium severity scores showed similar trajectories on days 1, 2 and 3 in both groups. CONCLUSION: The mentoring intervention was acceptable and feasible and shows promising results in improving patients and FC outcomes. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Nurses should involve, if willing, FC to participate in activities that optimise patient well-being FC to use recognized delirium management strategies like reorientation and reassurance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".