4.5 Article

Pharmacologic prevention and treatment of delirium in intensive care patients: A systematic review.

Journal

JOURNAL OF CRITICAL CARE
Volume 30, Issue 4, Pages 799-807

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2015.04.005

Keywords

Delirium; Prevention; ICU; Surgical

Funding

  1. Hospira, Inc

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: The purpose of the study is to determine if pharmacologic approaches are effective in prevention and treatment of delirium in critically ill patients. Materials and methods: We performed a systematic search to identify publications (from January 1980 to September 2014) that evaluated the pharmacologic interventions to treat or prevent delirium in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Results: From 2646 citations, 15 studies on prevention (6729 patients) and 7 studies on treatment (1784 patients) were selected and analyzed. Among studies that evaluated surgical patients, the pharmacologic interventions were associated with a reduction in delirium prevalence, ICU length of stay, and duration of mechanical ventilation, but with high heterogeneity (respectively, I-2 = 81%, P = .0013; I-2 = 97%, P < .001; and I-2 = 97%). Considering treatment studies, only 1 demonstrated a significant decrease in ICU length of stay using dexmedetomidine compared to haloperidol (Relative Risk, 0.62 [1.29-0.06]; I-2 = 97%), and only 1 found a shorter time to resolution of delirium using quetiapine (1.0 [confidence interval, 0.5-3.0] vs 4.5 [confidence interval, 2.0-7.0] days; P = .001). Conclusion: The use of antipsychotics for surgical ICU patients and dexmedetomidine for mechanically ventilated patients as a preventive strategy may reduce the prevalence of delirium in the ICU. None of the studied agents that were used for delirium treatment improved major clinical outcome, including mortality. (C) 2015 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