4.5 Article

Differences in 90-day mortality of delirium subtypes in the intensive care unit: A retrospective cohort study

Journal

JOURNAL OF CRITICAL CARE
Volume 53, Issue -, Pages 120-124

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2019.06.007

Keywords

Delirium; ICU; Critical care; Mortality; Subtypes

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction: Many intensive care unit (ICU) patients suffer from delirium which is associated with deleterious short-term and long-term effects, including mortality. We determined the association between different delirium subtypes and 90-day mortality. Materials and methods: Retrospective cohort study in ICU patients admitted in 2015-2017. Delirium, including its subtypes, was determined using the confusion assessment method-ICU (CAM-ICU) and Richmond agitation sedation scale (RASS). Exclusion criteriawere insufficient assessments and persistent coma. Cox-regression analysis was used to determine associations of delirium subtypes with 90-day mortality, including relevant covariates (APACHE-IV, length of ICU stay and mechanical ventilation). Results: 7362 ICU patientswere eligible of whom 6323 (86%) were included. Deliriumoccurred in 1600 (25%) patients (stratified for delirium subtype: N = 571-36% mixed, N = 485-30% rapidly reversible, N = 433-27% hypoactive, N = 111-7% hyperactive). The crude hazard ratio (HR) for overall prevalent delirium with 90-day mortality was 2.84 (95% CI: 2.32-3.49), and the adjusted HR 1.29 (95% CI: 1.01-1.65). The adjusted HR for 90-day mortality was 1.57 (95% CI: 1.51-2.14) for the mixed subtype, 1.40 (95% CI: 0.71-2.73) for hyperactive, 1.31 (95% CI: 0.93-1.84) for hypoactive and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.64-1.42) for rapidly reversible delirium. Conclusion: After adjusting for covariates, including competing risk factors, only the mixed delirium subtype was significantly associated with 90-day mortality. (C) 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available