G Bellelli1, A Morandi2, E Zanetti2, M Bozzini3, E Lucchi3, M Terrasi4, M Trabucchi2. 1. Department of Health Sciences,University of Milano Bicocca and Geriatric Clinic,San Gerardo Hospital,Monza,Italy. 2. Geriatric Research Group,Brescia,Italy. 3. Rehabilitation and Aged Care Unit Hospital Ancelle,Cremona,Italy. 4. Unità di Valutazione Multidimensionale,Direzione Infermieristica-Tecnica.Ospedale Morgagni- Pierantoni Forlì
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There are no studies that have identified the ability to recognize and manage delirium among Italian health providers caring for patients at risk. Therefore, the Italian Association of Psychogeriatrics (AIP) conducted a multicenter survey among doctors, nurses, psychologists and physiotherapists to assess their competence regarding the theme of delirium and its management in the everyday clinical practice. METHODS: The survey period was 1st June 2013 to 30th November 2013. The invitation to participate was sent via email, with publication on the AIP website. The survey included 14 questions and two case vignettes. RESULTS: A total of 648/1,500 responses were collected. Most responders were doctors (n = 322/800), followed by nurses (n = 225/500), psychologists (n = 51/100), and physiotherapists (n = 30/100). Generally, doctors and psychologists correctly defined delirium, while nurses and physiotherapists did not. The most frequently used diagnostic tools were the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-IV. Delirium intensity was rarely assessed. Hypoactive delirium was generally managed with non-pharmacological approaches, while hyperactive delirium with a combination of non-pharmacological and pharmacological approaches. However, possible causes of delirium were under-assessed by half of doctors and by the majority of other professionals. Nurses, psychologists and physiotherapists did not answer the case vignettes, while doctors identified the correct answer in most cases. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first Italian survey among health providers caring for patients at risk of delirium. This is also the first survey including doctors, nurses, psychologists and physiotherapists. The results emphasize the importance of training to improve knowledge of this relevant unmet medical need.
BACKGROUND: There are no studies that have identified the ability to recognize and manage delirium among Italian health providers caring for patients at risk. Therefore, the Italian Association of Psychogeriatrics (AIP) conducted a multicenter survey among doctors, nurses, psychologists and physiotherapists to assess their competence regarding the theme of delirium and its management in the everyday clinical practice. METHODS: The survey period was 1st June 2013 to 30th November 2013. The invitation to participate was sent via email, with publication on the AIP website. The survey included 14 questions and two case vignettes. RESULTS: A total of 648/1,500 responses were collected. Most responders were doctors (n = 322/800), followed by nurses (n = 225/500), psychologists (n = 51/100), and physiotherapists (n = 30/100). Generally, doctors and psychologists correctly defined delirium, while nurses and physiotherapists did not. The most frequently used diagnostic tools were the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-IV. Delirium intensity was rarely assessed. Hypoactive delirium was generally managed with non-pharmacological approaches, while hyperactive delirium with a combination of non-pharmacological and pharmacological approaches. However, possible causes of delirium were under-assessed by half of doctors and by the majority of other professionals. Nurses, psychologists and physiotherapists did not answer the case vignettes, while doctors identified the correct answer in most cases. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first Italian survey among health providers caring for patients at risk of delirium. This is also the first survey including doctors, nurses, psychologists and physiotherapists. The results emphasize the importance of training to improve knowledge of this relevant unmet medical need.
Authors: Giuseppe Bellelli; Alessandro Morandi; Marco Trabucchi; Guido Caironi; Daniele Coen; Carlo Fraticelli; Ciro Paolillo; Carolina Prevaldi; Angela Riccardi; Gianfranco Cervellin; Corrado Carabellese; Salvatore Putignano; Stefania Maggi; Antonio Cherubini; Paola Gnerre; Andrea Fontanella; Nicola Latronico; Concezione Tommasino; Antonio Corcione; Giovanni Ricevuti; Nicola Ferrara; Francesco De Filippi; Alberto Ferrari; Mario Guarino; Maria Pia Ruggieri; Pietro Amedeo Modesti; Carlo Locatelli; Patrizia Hrelia; Marco Otto Toscano; Emi Bondi; Antonio Tarasconi; Luca Ansaloni; Francesco Perticone Journal: Intern Emerg Med Date: 2017-07-24 Impact factor: 3.397
Authors: Alessandro Morandi; Elena Lucchi; Renato Turco; Sara Morghen; Fabio Guerini; Rossana Santi; Simona Gentile; David Meagher; Philippe Voyer; Donna M Fick; Eva M Schmitt; Sharon K Inouye; Marco Trabucchi; Giuseppe Bellelli Journal: J Psychosom Res Date: 2015-08-09 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Giuseppe Bellelli; Alessandro Morandi; Simona G Di Santo; Andrea Mazzone; Antonio Cherubini; Enrico Mossello; Mario Bo; Angelo Bianchetti; Renzo Rozzini; Ermellina Zanetti; Massimo Musicco; Alberto Ferrari; Nicola Ferrara; Marco Trabucchi Journal: BMC Med Date: 2016-07-18 Impact factor: 8.775
Authors: Alessandro Morandi; Christian Pozzi; Koen Milisen; Hans Hobbelen; Jennifer M Bottomley; Alessandro Lanzoni; Verena C Tatzer; Maria Gracia Carpena; Antonio Cherubini; Anette Ranhoff; Alasdair M J MacLullich; Andrew Teodorczuk; Giuseppe Bellelli Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2019-09-11 Impact factor: 3.921
Authors: Alexander Emery; James Wells; Stephen P Klaus; Melissa Mather; Ana Pessoa; Sarah T Pendlebury Journal: Dement Geriatr Cogn Dis Extra Date: 2020-12-15
Authors: Karolina Piotrowicz; Krzysztof Rewiuk; Stanisław Górski; Weronika Kałwak; Barbara Wizner; Agnieszka Pac; Michał Nowakowski; Tomasz Grodzicki Journal: Trials Date: 2018-08-14 Impact factor: 2.279