Suppr超能文献

捆绑干预对 ICU 谵妄的有效性:一项荟萃分析。

Effectiveness of Bundle Interventions on ICU Delirium: A Meta-Analysis.

机构信息

Department of Adult Care, School of Nursing, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.

Department of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, School of Public Heath, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.

出版信息

Crit Care Med. 2021 Feb 1;49(2):335-346. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000004773.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of bundle interventions on ICU delirium prevalence, duration, and other patients' adverse outcomes.

DATA SOURCES

The Cochrane Library, PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsychINFO, and MEDLINE from January 2000 to July 2020. The protocol of the study was registered in International prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42020163147).

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials or cohort studies that examined the following outcomes were included in the current study: ICU delirium prevalence and duration, proportion of patient-days with coma, ventilator-free days, mechanical ventilation days, ICU or hospital length of stay, and ICU or inhospital or 28-day mortality.

DATA EXTRACTION

Using a standardized data-collection form, two authors screened the studies and extracted the data independently, and assessed the studies' quality using the Modified Jadad Score Scale for randomized clinical trials and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort studies.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Eleven studies with a total of 26,384 adult participants were included in the meta-analysis. Five studies (three randomized clinical trials and two cohort studies) involving 18,638 patients demonstrated that ICU delirium prevalence was not reduced (risk ratio = 0.92; 95% CI, 0.68-1.24). Meta-analysis showed that the use of bundle interventions was not associated with shortening the duration of ICU delirium (mean difference = -1.42 d; 95% CI, -3.06 to 0.22; two randomized clinical trials and one cohort study), increasing ventilator-free days (mean difference = 1.56 d; 95% CI, -1.56 to 4.68; three randomized clinical trials), decreasing mechanical ventilation days (mean difference = -0.83 d; 95% CI, -1.80 to 0.14; four randomized clinical trials and two cohort studies), ICU length of stay (mean difference = -1.08 d; 95% CI, -2.16 to 0.00; seven randomized clinical trials and two cohort studies), and inhospital mortality (risk ratio = 0.86; 95% CI, 0.70-1.06; five randomized clinical trials and four cohort studies). However, bundle interventions are effective in reducing the proportion of patient-days experiencing coma (risk ratio = 0.47; 95% CI, 0.39-0.57; two cohort studies), hospital length of stay (mean difference = -1.47 d; 95% CI, -2.80 to -0.15; four randomized clinical trials and one cohort study), and 28-day mortality by 18% (risk ratio = 0.82; 95% CI, 0.69-0.99; three randomized clinical trials).

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis fails to support that bundle interventions are effective in reducing ICU delirium prevalence and duration, but supports that bundle interventions are effective in reducing the proportion of patient-days with coma, hospital length of stay, and 28-day mortality. Larger randomized clinical trials are needed to evaluate the impact of bundle interventions on ICU delirium and other clinical outcomes.

摘要

目的

评估集束干预对 ICU 谵妄发生率、持续时间和其他患者不良结局的影响。

资料来源

Cochrane 图书馆、PubMed、CINAHL、EMBASE、PsychINFO 和 MEDLINE,检索时间为 2000 年 1 月至 2020 年 7 月。该研究的方案已在国际前瞻性系统评价注册中心(CRD42020163147)注册。

研究选择

纳入了评估以下结局的随机临床试验或队列研究:ICU 谵妄发生率和持续时间、昏迷患者天数比例、无呼吸机天数、机械通气天数、ICU 或住院时间、ICU 或住院或 28 天死亡率。

数据提取

两名作者使用标准化数据采集表独立筛选研究并提取数据,并使用改良 Jadad 评分量表评估随机临床试验的研究质量,使用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表评估队列研究的研究质量。

数据分析

共有 11 项研究(26384 名成年参与者)纳入荟萃分析。五项研究(三项随机临床试验和两项队列研究)涉及 18638 名患者,结果表明 ICU 谵妄发生率并未降低(风险比=0.92;95%CI,0.68-1.24)。荟萃分析显示,集束干预并不能缩短 ICU 谵妄的持续时间(平均差值=-1.42d;95%CI,-3.06 至 0.22;两项随机临床试验和一项队列研究)、增加无呼吸机天数(平均差值=1.56d;95%CI,-1.56 至 4.68;三项随机临床试验)、减少机械通气天数(平均差值=-0.83d;95%CI,-1.80 至 0.14;四项随机临床试验和两项队列研究)、ICU 住院时间(平均差值=-1.08d;95%CI,-2.16 至 0.00;七项随机临床试验和两项队列研究)和住院死亡率(风险比=0.86;95%CI,0.70-1.06;五项随机临床试验和四项队列研究)。然而,集束干预可以有效降低昏迷患者天数比例(风险比=0.47;95%CI,0.39-0.57;两项队列研究)、住院时间(平均差值=-1.47d;95%CI,-2.80 至-0.15;四项随机临床试验和一项队列研究)和 28 天死亡率(风险比=0.82;95%CI,0.69-0.99;三项随机临床试验)。

结论

本荟萃分析结果未能支持集束干预能有效降低 ICU 谵妄发生率和持续时间,但支持集束干预能有效降低昏迷患者天数比例、住院时间和 28 天死亡率。需要更大规模的随机临床试验来评估集束干预对 ICU 谵妄和其他临床结局的影响。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ea1a/7803454/21c6c475ac57/ccm-49-0335-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验