OBJECTIVES: To determine whether a bundled intervention can increase detection of delirium and facilitate safer use of high-risk medications. DESIGN: Pre-post interventional trial. SETTING: Large academic medical center. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals aged 70 and older (n = 19,949) admitted between May 1, 2008, September 30, 2011. Individuals aged 80 and older admitted after April 26, 2010, received the intervention, those aged 80 and older admitted before were primary controls, and those aged 70 to 79 were concurrent controls. INTERVENTION: The intervention uses a checklist promoting delirium prevention, recognition and management, and modifies the computerized provider order entry system to provide care focused on elderly adults. MEASUREMENTS: Frequency of orders for activating the rapid response team for altered mental status, frequency of orders for haloperidol in excess of 0.5 mg or intravenous (IV) morphine in excess of 2 mg, and discharge disposition. RESULTS:Participants receiving the intervention had a mean age of 86.1 ± 4.6; 58.2% were female. The number of orders to activate the rapid response team for altered mental status increased in participants receiving the bundle and in controls (odds ratio (OR) for the difference of differences = 1.23 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.68-2.24, P = .49)). Participants receiving the bundle were less likely to receive more than 0.5 mg of IV, intramuscular, or oral haloperidol (OR = 0.60, 95% CI = 0.39-0.91, P = .02) and more than 2 mg of IV morphine (OR = 0.52, 95% CI = 0.42-0.63, P < .001). Participants who received the bundle were more likely to be discharged home than to extended care facilities (OR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.04-1.35, P = .01). CONCLUSION: An intervention focused on delirium prevention and recognition by bedside staff combined with computerized decision support facilitates safer prescribing of high-risk medications and possibly results in less need for extended care.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: To determine whether a bundled intervention can increase detection of delirium and facilitate safer use of high-risk medications. DESIGN: Pre-post interventional trial. SETTING: Large academic medical center. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals aged 70 and older (n = 19,949) admitted between May 1, 2008, September 30, 2011. Individuals aged 80 and older admitted after April 26, 2010, received the intervention, those aged 80 and older admitted before were primary controls, and those aged 70 to 79 were concurrent controls. INTERVENTION: The intervention uses a checklist promoting delirium prevention, recognition and management, and modifies the computerized provider order entry system to provide care focused on elderly adults. MEASUREMENTS: Frequency of orders for activating the rapid response team for altered mental status, frequency of orders for haloperidol in excess of 0.5 mg or intravenous (IV) morphine in excess of 2 mg, and discharge disposition. RESULTS:Participants receiving the intervention had a mean age of 86.1 ± 4.6; 58.2% were female. The number of orders to activate the rapid response team for altered mental status increased in participants receiving the bundle and in controls (odds ratio (OR) for the difference of differences = 1.23 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.68-2.24, P = .49)). Participants receiving the bundle were less likely to receive more than 0.5 mg of IV, intramuscular, or oral haloperidol (OR = 0.60, 95% CI = 0.39-0.91, P = .02) and more than 2 mg of IV morphine (OR = 0.52, 95% CI = 0.42-0.63, P < .001). Participants who received the bundle were more likely to be discharged home than to extended care facilities (OR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.04-1.35, P = .01). CONCLUSION: An intervention focused on delirium prevention and recognition by bedside staff combined with computerized decision support facilitates safer prescribing of high-risk medications and possibly results in less need for extended care.
Authors: Ravishankar Jayadevappa; Bernard S Bloom; Donna Brady Raziano; Risa Lavizzo-Mourey Journal: Int J Technol Assess Health Care Date: 2003 Impact factor: 2.188
Authors: Paula A Rochon; Therese A Stukel; Kathy Sykora; Sudeep Gill; Susan Garfinkel; Geoffrey M Anderson; Sharon-Lise T Normand; Muhammad Mamdani; Philip E Lee; Ping Li; Susan E Bronskill; Connie Marras; Jerry H Gurwitz Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2005-09-12
Authors: Michael D Howell; Long Ngo; Patricia Folcarelli; Julius Yang; Lawrence Mottley; Edward R Marcantonio; Kenneth E Sands; Donald Moorman; Mark D Aronson Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2012-09 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: S K Inouye; S T Bogardus; P A Charpentier; L Leo-Summers; D Acampora; T R Holford; L M Cooney Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1999-03-04 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Douglas L Leslie; Ying Zhang; Sidney T Bogardus; Theodore R Holford; Linda S Leo-Summers; Sharon K Inouye Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2005-03 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Shoshana J Herzig; Michael B Rothberg; Jamey R Guess; Jerry H Gurwitz; Edward R Marcantonio Journal: J Hosp Med Date: 2016-04-30 Impact factor: 2.960
Authors: Shoshana J Herzig; Michael B Rothberg; Jamey R Guess; Jennifer P Stevens; John Marshall; Jerry H Gurwitz; Edward R Marcantonio Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2016-02 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Mitchell Kim; Steven H Mitchell; Medley Gatewood; Katherine A Bennett; Paul R Sutton; Carol A Crawford; Itay Bentov; Mamatha Damodarasamy; Stephen J Kaplan; May J Reed Journal: Drug Healthc Patient Saf Date: 2017-11-08