van Loveren Kate, Singla Arnav, Sinvani Liron, Calandrella Christopher, Perera Thomas, Brave Martina, Becker Lance, Li Timmy
North Shore University Hospital, Department of Emergency Medicine, Manhasset, New York.
Center for Health Innovations and Outcomes Research, Feinstein Institutes of Medical Research, Northwell Health, Manhasset, New York.
West J Emerg Med. 2021 Apr 9;22(3):726-735. doi: 10.5811/westjem.2021.1.49320.
Our study aimed to determine 1) the association between time spent in the emergency department (ED) hallway and the development of delirium and 2) the hospital location of delirium development.
This single-center, retrospective chart review included patients 18+ years old admitted to the hospital after presenting, without baseline cognitive impairment, to the ED in 2018. We identified the Delirium group by the following: key words describing delirium; orders for psychotropics, special observation, and restraints; or documented positive Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) screen. The Control group included patients not meeting delirium criteria. We used a multivariable logistic regression model, while adjusting for confounders, to assess the odds of delirium development associated with percentage of ED LOS spent in the hallway.
A total of 25,156 patients met inclusion criteria with 1920 (7.6%) meeting delirium criteria. Delirium group vs. Control group patients spent a greater percentage of time in the ED hallway (median 50.5% vs 10.8%, P<0.001); had longer ED LOS (median 11.94 vs 8.12 hours, P<0.001); had more ED room transfers (median 5 vs 4, P<0.001); and had longer hospital LOS (median 5.0 vs 4.6 days, P<0.001). Patients more frequently developed delirium in the ED (77.5%) than on inpatient units (22.5%). The relative odds of a patient developing delirium increased by 3.31 times for each percent increase in ED hallway time (95% confidence interval, 2.85, 3.83).
Patients with delirium had more ED hallway exposure, longer ED LOS, and more ED room transfers. Understanding delirium in the ED has substantial implications for improving patient safety.
我们的研究旨在确定1)在急诊科(ED)走廊停留的时间与谵妄发生之间的关联,以及2)谵妄发生的医院位置。
这项单中心回顾性图表审查纳入了2018年在无基线认知障碍的情况下到急诊科就诊后入院的18岁及以上患者。我们通过以下方式确定谵妄组:描述谵妄的关键词;开具精神药物、特殊观察和约束的医嘱;或记录的阳性意识错乱评估法(CAM)筛查结果。对照组包括不符合谵妄标准的患者。我们使用多变量逻辑回归模型,在调整混杂因素的同时,评估与在走廊度过的急诊科住院时间百分比相关的谵妄发生几率。
共有25156名患者符合纳入标准,其中1920名(7.6%)符合谵妄标准。谵妄组患者与对照组患者相比,在急诊科走廊停留的时间百分比更高(中位数分别为50.5%和10.8%,P<0.001);急诊科住院时间更长(中位数分别为11.94小时和8.12小时,P<0.001);急诊科病房转科次数更多(中位数分别为5次和4次,P<0.001);住院时间更长(中位数分别为5.0天和4.6天,P<0.001)。患者在急诊科发生谵妄的频率(77.5%)高于住院病房(22.5%)。急诊科走廊时间每增加1%,患者发生谵妄的相对几率增加3.31倍(95%置信区间,2.85,3.83)。
谵妄患者在急诊科走廊停留的时间更长、急诊科住院时间更长且急诊科病房转科次数更多。了解急诊科的谵妄情况对提高患者安全具有重要意义。