The prevention of delirium in elderly with obstructive sleep apnea (PODESA) study: protocol for a multi-centre prospective randomized, controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Delirium is a common problem that occurs in 5-50% of elderly individuals following surgery. Patients who develop delirium after surgery are at increased risk for serious complications. Recent studies suggest that patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), a sleep disorder characterized by repeated episodes of complete or partial blockage of the upper airway - are at greater risk to develop delirium. OSA is more common in elderly individuals but is often undiagnosed. Identification and treatment of unrecognized OSA may reduce the incidence of postoperative delirium. However, few studies have investigated the effect of perioperative treatment of OSA to prevent postoperative delirium. METHODS: This multi-centre randomized controlled trial will enrol 634 elderly patients undergoing elective hip/knee replacement surgery. The study has been approved by the Research Ethics Boards of the three participating institutions. Patients will be screened with the STOP-Bang questionnaire. Those with a score of 3 or greater will have a portable home sleep study using the ApneaLink™ Air device. Patients identified to have OSA will be randomized to 1) Auto-titrating continuous positive airway pressure (APAP) applied during sleep for 72 h after surgery or until discharge if they are discharged before 72 h or 2) Control group - routine care, no APAP. All patients will be evaluated for delirium for 72 h after surgery or until discharge if they are discharged before 72 h. The primary outcome is the occurrence of delirium - assessed twice daily using the Confusion Assessment Method for 72 h or until discharge if the hospital stay is <72 h. DISCUSSION: Delirium is associated with increased morbidity and mortality, and higher healthcare costs. With the aging population, the incidence of postoperative delirium will likely increase as the number of elderly individuals undergoing surgery rises. The results of our study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at local and international medical conferences. Our study findings may lead to improved surgical outcomes, enhanced patient safety and reduced healthcare costs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was retrospectively registered at clinicaltrials.gov NCT02954224 on November 3, 2016.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".