MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3093460219 · doi:10.1097/pcc.0000000000002591

Prevalence of ICU Delirium in Postoperative Pediatric Cardiac Surgery Patients

2020· article· en· W3093460219 on OpenAlexaff
Sandra Staveski, Rita H. Pickler, Philip R. Khoury, Nicholas J. Ollberding, Amy Donnellan, Jennifer A. Mauney, Patricia Lincoln, Jennifer Baird, Frances Gilliland, Amber D. Merritt, Laura Presnell, Alexa Lanese, Amy Jo Lisanti, Belinda J. Large, Lori D. Fineman, Katherine H. Gibson, Leigh A. Mohler, Louise Callow, Sean Barnes, Ruby Whalen, Mary Jo C. Grant, Cathy Sheppard, Andrea Kline-Tilford, Page Steadman, Heidi C. Shafland, Karen M. Corlett, Serena Kelly, Laura A. Ortman, Christine Peyton, Sandra Hagstrom, Ashlee Shields, Tracy Nye, Tatiana Álvarez, Lindsey Justice, Seth T. Kidwell, Andrew N. Redington, Martha A. Q. Curley

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Critical Care Medicine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesSickKids FoundationStollery Children's HospitalHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDeliriumCardiac surgeryMechanical ventilationPsychological interventionEmergency medicineAnesthesiaPediatricsIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of ICU delirium in children less than 18 years old that underwent cardiac surgery within the last 30 days. The secondary aim of the study was to identify risk factors associated with ICU delirium in postoperative pediatric cardiac surgical patients. DESIGN: A 1-day, multicenter point-prevalence study of delirium in pediatric postoperative cardiac surgery patients. SETTING: Twenty-seven pediatric cardiac and general critical care units caring for postoperative pediatric cardiac surgery patients in North America. PATIENTS: All children less than 18 years old hospitalized in the cardiac critical care units at 06:00 on a randomly selected, study day. INTERVENTIONS: Eligible children were screened for delirium using the Cornell Assessment of Pediatric Delirium by the study team in collaboration with the bedside nurse. MEASUREMENT AND MAIN RESULTS: Overall, 181 patients were enrolled and 40% (n = 73) screened positive for delirium. There were no statistically significant differences in patient demographic information, severity of defect or surgical procedure, past medical history, or postoperative day between patients screening positive or negative for delirium. Our bivariate analysis found those patients screening positive had a longer duration of mechanical ventilation (12.8 vs 5.1 d; p = 0.02); required more vasoactive support (55% vs 26%; p = 0.0009); and had a higher number of invasive catheters (4 vs 3 catheters; p = 0.001). Delirium-positive patients received more total opioid exposure (1.80 vs 0.36 mg/kg/d of morphine equivalents; p < 0.001), did not have an ambulation or physical therapy schedule (p = 0.02), had not been out of bed in the previous 24 hours (p < 0.0002), and parents were not at the bedside at time of data collection (p = 0.008). In the mixed-effects logistic regression analysis of modifiable risk factors, the following variables were associated with a positive delirium screen: 1) pain score, per point increase (odds ratio, 1.3; 1.06-1.60); 2) total opioid exposure, per mg/kg/d increase (odds ratio, 1.35; 1.06-1.73); 3) SBS less than 0 (odds ratio, 4.01; 1.21-13.27); 4) pain medication or sedative administered in the previous 4 hours (odds ratio, 3.49; 1.32-9.28); 5) no progressive physical therapy or ambulation schedule in their medical record (odds ratio, 4.40; 1.41-13.68); and 6) parents not at bedside at time of data collection (odds ratio, 2.31; 1.01-5.31). CONCLUSIONS: We found delirium to be a common problem after cardiac surgery with several important modifiable risk factors.

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)0.082
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.082
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations79
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric Critical Care MedicineSame topicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive DisordersFrench-language works237,207