Khan Babar A, Perkins Anthony J, Gao Sujuan, Hui Siu L, Campbell Noll L, Farber Mark O, Chlan Linda L, Boustani Malaz A
1Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN. 2Indiana University Center for Aging Research, Indianapolis, IN. 3Regenstrief Institute, Inc., Indianapolis, IN. 4Indiana University Center for Health Innovation and Implementation Science, Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute, Indianapolis, IN. 5Eskenazi Health, Indianapolis, IN. 6Department of Pharmacy Practice, Purdue University College of Pharmacy, West Lafayette, IN. 7Nursing Research Division, Department of Nursing, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Crit Care Med. 2017 May;45(5):851-857. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000002368.
Delirium severity is independently associated with longer hospital stays, nursing home placement, and death in patients outside the ICU. Delirium severity in the ICU is not routinely measured because the available instruments are difficult to complete in critically ill patients. We designed our study to assess the reliability and validity of a new ICU delirium severity tool, the Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU-7 delirium severity scale.
Observational cohort study.
Medical, surgical, and progressive ICUs of three academic hospitals.
Five hundred eighteen adult (≥ 18 yr) patients.
None.
Patients received the Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU, Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale, and Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98 assessments. A 7-point scale (0-7) was derived from responses to the Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU and Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale items. Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU-7 showed high internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.85) and good correlation with Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98 scores (correlation coefficient = 0.64). Known-groups validity was supported by the separation of mechanically ventilated and nonventilated assessments. Median Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU-7 scores demonstrated good predictive validity with higher odds (odds ratio = 1.47; 95% CI = 1.30-1.66) of in-hospital mortality and lower odds (odds ratio = 0.8; 95% CI = 0.72-0.9) of being discharged home after adjusting for age, race, gender, severity of illness, and chronic comorbidities. Higher Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU-7 scores were also associated with increased length of ICU stay (p = 0.001).
Our results suggest that Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU-7 is a valid and reliable delirium severity measure among ICU patients. Further research comparing it to other delirium severity measures, its use in delirium efficacy trials, and real-life implementation is needed to determine its role in research and clinical practice.
谵妄严重程度与重症监护病房(ICU)以外患者的住院时间延长、入住疗养院及死亡独立相关。ICU中谵妄严重程度未常规测量,因为现有工具在危重症患者中难以完成。我们设计本研究以评估一种新的ICU谵妄严重程度工具——ICU-7谵妄严重程度量表(重症监护病房意识模糊评估方法)的可靠性和有效性。
观察性队列研究。
三家学术医院的内科、外科及逐步升级的ICU。
518例成年(≥18岁)患者。
无。
患者接受ICU意识模糊评估方法、里士满躁动镇静量表及谵妄评定量表修订版98评估。根据对ICU意识模糊评估方法和里士满躁动镇静量表项目的回答得出一个7分制量表(0 - 7)。ICU-7意识模糊评估方法显示出高内部一致性(克朗巴哈系数α = 0.85),且与谵妄评定量表修订版98评分具有良好相关性(相关系数 = 0.64)。机械通气和非机械通气评估的区分支持了已知组效度。ICU-7意识模糊评估方法的中位数评分显示出良好的预测效度,在校正年龄、种族、性别、疾病严重程度和慢性合并症后,住院死亡率的比值比更高(比值比 = 1.47;95%置信区间 = 1.30 - 1.66),出院回家的比值比更低(比值比 = 0.8;95%置信区间 = 0.72 - 0.9)。更高的ICU-7意识模糊评估方法评分也与ICU住院时间延长相关(p = 0.001)。
我们的结果表明,ICU-7意识模糊评估方法是ICU患者中一种有效且可靠的谵妄严重程度测量工具。需要进一步研究将其与其他谵妄严重程度测量工具进行比较,研究其在谵妄疗效试验中的应用以及在实际生活中的实施情况,以确定其在研究和临床实践中的作用。