MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3167034741 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-567310/v1

Therapeutic Interventions are Important Risk Factors for Delirium in the ICU Setting : A Multicenter Observational Study

2021· preprint· en· W3167034741 on OpenAlexaff
Ying Liu, Zhiyong Yuan, Shixia Cai, Xiaoning Han, Kai Song, Mei Wang, Haifeng Teng, Yunbo Sun, Jinyan Xing

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsSt. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeliriumMedicineObservational studySOFA scoreIntensive care unitPsychological interventionUnivariate analysisIntensive care medicineIncidence (geometry)MidazolamEmergency medicineInternal medicineMultivariate analysisAnesthesiaSedation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Delirium is an important independent predictor of negative clinical outcomes in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. The purpose of this study was to investigate the territorial incidence of ICU delirium, its related risk factors, and short-term outcomes in Shandong Province, China, to provide precise information for territorial patient management. Methods A multicenter prospective observational study was conducted. Patients with delirium were defined as any patient with at least one positive CAM-ICU or ICDSC assessment. Demographics, admission clinical data, daily interventions provided to patients and environmental factors were collected. Results From May 1, 2018 to Jan 31, 2020, 536 noncomatose patients were ultimately eligible for the study. One hundred eighteen patients (22%) experienced delirium at least once. In the univariate analysis, age (p = 0.009), SOFA score (p = 0.006), a history of cerebrovascular disease (p = 0.044) and impaired renal function (p = 0.003) were risk factors for delirium. Most therapeutic interventions were linked to delirium in the univariate analysis, including enteral nutrition (p = 0.000), artificial airway (p = 0.021), nasogastric tube (p = 0.001), use of restraint straps (p = 0.000), and use of sedative medications, including midazolam (p = 0.003), propofol (p = 0.032) and butorphanol (p = 0.028). Among the patient’s vital signs and laboratory examinations performed on the day of assessment, body temperature, BUN levels and CRP levels were risk factors for delirium. Midazolam use, chronic renal insufficiency, physical restraints, nosogastric tube, enteral nutrition, and CRP and BUN levels were factors associated with an increased risk of delirium in the multivariate analysis. The durations of mechanical ventilation and ICU stay in patients with delirium was significantly higher than those in patients without delirium [8 (IQR: 4–14) vs 5 (IQR: 3–10) and 9 (IQR: 4–17) vs 6 (IQR: 4–12), p < 0.05]. Conclusions Delirium was associated with prolonged mechanical ventilation and a prolonged ICU stay. Based on the findings from this study, we should not only reduce the use of sedatives and analgesics but also minimize invasive operations, including the placement of nasogastric tubes, to recover eternal nutrition for ICU patients and avoid physical restraints as much as possible to prevent delirium. Trial registration: This study was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR1900021360).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.281
GPT teacher head0.490
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders→French-language works237,207→