Context In the intensive care unit (ICU), delirium is a common yet underdiagnosed
form of organ dysfunction, and its contribution to patient outcomes is unclear.
Objective To determine if delirium is an independent predictor of clinical outcomes,
including 6-month mortality and length of stay among ICU patients receiving
mechanical ventilation.
Design, Setting, and Participants Prospective cohort study enrolling 275 consecutive mechanically ventilated
patients admitted to adult medical and coronary ICUs of a US university-based
medical center between February 2000 and May 2001. Patients were followed
up for development of delirium over 2158 ICU days using the Confusion Assessment
Method for the ICU and the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale.
Main Outcome Measures Primary outcomes included 6-month mortality, overall hospital length
of stay, and length of stay in the post-ICU period. Secondary outcomes were
ventilator-free days and cognitive impairment at hospital discharge.
Results Of 275 patients, 51 (18.5%) had persistent coma and died in the hospital.
Among the remaining 224 patients, 183 (81.7%) developed delirium at some point
during the ICU stay. Baseline demographics including age, comorbidity scores,
dementia scores, activities of daily living, severity of illness, and admission
diagnoses were similar between those with and without delirium (P>.05 for all). Patients who developed delirium had higher 6-month
mortality rates (34% vs 15%, P = .03) and spent 10
days longer in the hospital than those who never developed delirium (P<.001). After adjusting for covariates (including age,
severity of illness, comorbid conditions, coma, and use of sedatives or analgesic
medications), delirium was independently associated with higher 6-month mortality
(adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 3.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4-7.7; P = .008), and longer hospital stay (adjusted HR, 2.0;
95% CI, 1.4-3.0; P<.001). Delirium in the ICU
was also independently associated with a longer post-ICU stay (adjusted HR,
1.6; 95% CI, 1.2-2.3; P = .009), fewer median days
alive and without mechanical ventilation (19 [interquartile range, 4-23] vs
24 [19-26]; adjusted P = .03), and a higher incidence
of cognitive impairment at hospital discharge (adjusted HR, 9.1; 95% CI, 2.3-35.3; P = .002).
Conclusion Delirium was an independent predictor of higher 6-month mortality and
longer hospital stay even after adjusting for relevant covariates including
coma, sedatives, and analgesics in patients receiving mechanical ventilation.
In the United States, 55 000 patients are cared for daily in more
than 6 000 intensive care units (ICUs).1 The
most common reason for ICU admission is respiratory failure and the need for
a mechanical ventilator.2 Although hospital
mortality for such patients ranges from 30% to 50%,3 only
16% of patients receiving mechanical ventilation die directly of respiratory
failure.4 In fact, nonpulmonary acute organ
dysfunction contributes importantly to mortality.5,6 Delirium
is one of these nonpulmonary considerations yet remains understudied in critically
ill patients. Although scoring systems for severity of illness have included
the Glasgow Coma Scale7,8 as an
important predictor of outcome, there has been no in-depth analysis focusing
on the direct contribution of delirium to clinical outcomes in critically
ill ICU patients.
Management of patients with sepsis and multiorgan failure has traditionally
been centered on dysfunction in the heart, lungs, or kidneys rather than the
brain, though the brain is one of the organs most commonly involved.9-13 Delirium
has received little attention in ICU settings because it is (1) rarely a primary
reason for admission, (2) often believed to be iatrogenic due to medications,
(3) frequently explained away as "ICU psychosis," and (4) believed to have
no adverse consequences in terms of patients' ultimate outcome.14-16 Last,
there is a paucity of published trials of prevention or treatment of delirium
showing altered outcomes17 and none in ICU
patients.
Even among clinicians who exhibit an overall appreciation for delirium
as an important form of organ dysfunction, recent data point to a general
disconnect between its perceived importance and current monitoring practices.
Despite recent guidelines suggesting that ICU patients be monitored daily
for delirium,18 only 6.4% (58/912) of critical
care professionals surveyed in 2001-2002 reported objectively monitoring for
this condition.19 Indeed, delirium, especially
the hypoactive subtype,20,21 goes
unrecognized in more than two thirds of the patients in clinical practice.22-25
The original Confusion Assessment Method of Inouye et al26 popularized
monitoring of delirium by nonpsychiatrists. In non-ICU hospital settings,
delirium has been associated with prolonged stay, greater dependency, subsequent
institutionalization, and increased mortality.17,27-34 However,
only recently have valid and reliable instruments to measure both level of
arousal35-37 and
delirium38-40 in
ICU patients become available. Using these instruments, our pilot study showed
that delirium in the ICU was an important determinant of length of hospital
stay.41 We undertook the current study to test
the hypothesis that delirium in the ICU is an independent predictor of 6-month
mortality and length of stay among patients receiving mechanical ventilation
even after adjusting for other covariates.
The Vanderbilt University institutional review board approved this study,
and written informed consent was obtained from patients or their surrogates.
Enrollment criteria included any adult, mechanically ventilated patient admitted
to medical or coronary ICUs of the 631-bed Vanderbilt University Medical Center
between February 2000 to May 2001. While no outcomes data from this report
have been previously published, other data from this cohort have been published.37,39,42 Exclusion criteria,
defined a priori, are outlined in the patient flow diagram (Figure 1).
Study nurses enrolled patients each morning and recorded baseline demographic
information. Information collected at enrollment included patient demographics
and severity of illness using the most abnormal values obtained during the
first 24 hours of ICU stay to calculate Acute Physiology and Chronic Health
Evaluation II (APACHE II) (scale range, 0-71)7 and
Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) (scale range, 0-24) scores.8 The Charlson Comorbidity Index, which represents the
sum of a weighted index that takes into account the number and seriousness
of preexisting comorbid conditions, was calculated as per Deyo et al.43 Surrogate assessments were used for baseline activities
of daily living (scale range, 0-12),44 visual
and hearing deficits, and the modified Blessed Dementia Rating Scale (mBDRS)
(scale range, 0-17),45 an instrument validated
against brain pathological specimens to measure a patient's baseline likelihood
of dementia.
Delirium has more than 25 synonyms, including acute encephalopathy,
septic encephalopathy, toxic psychosis, ICU psychosis, and acute confusional
state.10,11,14,46,47 Delirium
will be the term used herein, because the neurologic monitoring instrument
used in this investigation (described below) was developed and validated using Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth
Edition criteria for delirium.48
Definitions and Patient Assessments. Patients'
neurologic status was assessed daily by the study nurses and defined as normal,
delirious, or comatose using a 1- to 2-minute neurologic assessment that objectively
measured patients' arousal and delirium status. Arousal was measured using
the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS).36,37 The
RASS is a well-validated and highly reliable 10-point scale with scores from
+1 to +4 assigned for levels of agitation through combativeness, 0 assigned
for alert and calm state, and –1 to –5 assigned for successive
levels of depressed arousal or coma.37 Delirium,
the independent variable, was measured using a well-validated and highly reliable
instrument, the Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU (CAM-ICU).39,40 The CAM-ICU assessment was positive
if patients demonstrated an acute change or fluctuation in the course of their
mental status (as determined by abnormalities or fluctuations in the RASS
scores), plus inattention and either disorganized thinking or an altered level
of consciousness.39,40 By definition,
patients were delirious if they responded to verbal
stimulation with eye opening (RASS scores of –3 to +4) and had positive
CAM-ICU assessments. Patients were defined as comatose if
they responded only to physical/painful stimulation with movement but had
no eye opening (RASS score, –4) or if they had no response to verbal
or physical stimulation (RASS score, –5). Patients were defined as normal if they were not delirious or comatose.
Categorization by Explanatory Variable. Using
daily assessments described above, it was determined a priori that patients
would be included in a "delirium" group if they ever had delirium while in
the ICU, and all others would be included in a "no delirium" group. To understand
the phenomenology of these groups, patients in the delirium group were further
categorized as "delirium only" (ie, delirium but no episodes of coma) or as
"delirium-coma" (ie, delirium and coma). Likewise, patients in the no delirium
group were categorized as "normal" (ie, no episodes of delirium or coma) or
as "coma-normal" (ie, transient coma [eg, coma due to sedative medications]
followed by consistently normal examinations). Patients who were comatose
on all ICU evaluations during the study were categorized as "persistent coma."
The primary outcome variables included 6-month mortality, overall hospital
length of stay, and length of stay in the post-ICU period. In addition, we
included 2 secondary outcome variables: ventilator-free days and cognitive
impairment at discharge. Ventilator-free days were defined as the number of
days alive and free of mechanical ventilation between study enrollment and
day 28.49 Cognitive impairment at discharge
was defined as a Mini-Mental State Examination score50 of
less than 24 out of a possible 30 points.51-53
Patients' baseline demographic and clinical variables were assessed
using Wilcoxon rank sum tests for continuous variables; Fisher exact tests
were used for comparing proportions. For analysis of analgesics (morphine,
fentanyl) and sedatives (lorazepam, propofol), mean daily ICU dose and cumulative
dose per patient during the ICU stay were used as summary measures. Administered
benzodiazepines were either lorazepam or midazolam, and midazolam dose was
converted to "lorazepam equivalents" (henceforth referred to as lorazepam)
by dividing by 3 to achieve equipotent dose.54 Wilcoxon
rank sum tests were used to compare distributions of the drugs between the
no delirium and delirium groups.
Six-month mortality, overall hospital length of stay, and length of
stay after first ICU discharge were analyzed using time-to-event analyses.
Patients were followed up from time of enrollment until hospital discharge.
All survivors were then followed up using the hospital's electronic record
system, monthly telephone calls, and in-person visits for survival status.
Kaplan-Meier survival curves were used for graphical presentation of time
to death or hospital discharge, and log-rank statistics were used to assess
difference by overall delirium status.55 For
6-month mortality analyses, patients were censored at the time of last contact
alive or at 6 months from enrollment, whichever was first. Censoring for length-of-stay
analyses occurred at time of hospital death.
Cox proportional hazard regression models with time-dependent covariates56-58 were used to obtain
hazard ratios (HRs) of death up to 6 months from enrollment and HRs of remaining
in hospital. Details of the model construction are described below. The 11
covariates in the multivariable Cox regression models included a time-dependent
coma variable, 6 additional baseline covariates chosen a priori based on clinical
relevance (patient age at enrollment, Charlson Comorbidity Index,43 mBDRS score,45 APACHE
II score,7 SOFA score,8,59,60 admitting
diagnoses of sepsis or acute respiratory distress syndrome), and the 4 sedative
and analgesic medications used in this cohort (lorazepam, propofol, morphine,
and fentanyl). Patients' neurologic status (normal, delirious, comatose) was
updated daily in the ICU, and time-dependent variables were used for delirium
and coma separately. This time-dependent delirium incidence variable was coded
as 0 for the days prior to the first delirious event, and coded as 1 thereafter.
The time-dependent coma incidence variable was coded similarly.
In addition, we performed a similar analysis that considered the duration
of delirium using cumulative number of days of delirium, coding the time-dependent
delirium duration variable as 0 until a delirium event occurred, and then
incrementally adding 1 when each additional day of delirium occurred. The
time-dependent coma duration variable was created similarly for this additional
analysis.
The time-dependent delirium incidence variable was used as the main
independent variable in all Cox models with adjustment for time-dependent
coma incidence variable. Cox regression models were then used to further control
for the additional 6 baseline covariates mentioned above and the 4 sedative
and analgesic medications. Dummy coding was used for missing observations
with the mBDRS. Because coma was already being handled as a covariate in the
model, the APACHE II and SOFA scores were calculated without inclusion of
the Glasgow Coma Scale. To incorporate sedative (lorazepam, propofol) and
analgesic (morphine, fentanyl) medications in a time-dependent fashion, daily
use of medication was coded as 1 for each of 4 drug variables separately if
any amount was administered prior to daily assessment of neurologic status
and was coded as 0 otherwise. In an additional analysis, time-dependent cumulative
dose of sedatives and narcotics were incorporated into the model. Collinearity
among all independent variables was evaluated by examining the variance inflation
factor.61 Assumptions of proportional hazard
for the final models were evaluated by examining interactions between time
and each variable in the model. When significant interactions were found,
those interaction terms were included in the final model.
Ventilator-free days were calculated as described in the "Dependent
Variables" section above and compared between the delirium and no delirium
groups. A Poisson regression model with overdispersion correction was used
to control for the set of covariates stated above. Presence or absence of
cognitive impairment at hospital discharge was assessed as described in the
"Dependent Variables" section and compared between the delirium and no delirium
groups using Fisher exact tests, and a logistic regression model was used
to adjust for the set of 11 covariates. All data analyses were performed using
SAS 8.02 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC); a significance level of .05 was used for
statistical inferences.
Patients' Baseline Characteristics
During the study period, 555 mechanically ventilated ICU patients were
admitted, of whom 275 (49.5%) were enrolled within a mean and median of 1
day and 280 met exclusion criteria (Figure
1). On enrollment, 23 (8.4%) patients were defined as normal, 89
(32.4%) as delirious, and 163 (59.3%) as comatose. Figure 2 shows the proportion of patients in each neurologic category
(as well as death or ICU discharge) over the first 14 days from study enrollment.
Of the 275 enrolled patients, 51 (18.5%) never woke up from coma and experienced
100% ICU mortality after a median of 3 (interquartile range [IQR], 1-5) days.
These 51 patients with persistent coma had a mean age of 55 (SD, 16) years
and similar baseline characteristics compared with the remaining 224 patients,
with the exception of greater severity of illness at enrollment as measured
by mean APACHE II scores (29.5 [SD, 9]) and SOFA scores (12.1 (SD, 3.8]) and
by greater rates of malignancy (14%) and sepsis/acute respiratory distress
syndrome (63%) as admission diagnoses (P<.05 for
all). Due to their 100% mortality and the inability to evaluate them for the
independent variable (delirium), patients categorized as experiencing persistent
coma were not included in outcomes analyses. The remaining 224 patients were
used for these analyses; their baseline characteristics are shown in Table 1. The cohort was divided into 2
groups according to whether they ever developed delirium in the ICU. There
were no significant differences between the delirium and no delirium groups
for demographic variables, baseline comorbidities, activities of daily living,
severity-of-illness scores, organ dysfunction scores, or admission diagnoses.
Prevalence of Delirium and Coma
All 224 patients were followed up for development of delirium over 2158
ICU days. Forty-one patients (18.3%) never demonstrated delirium in the ICU
(ie, the no delirium group); of those, 24 (58.5%) were in a coma for a median
of 1.5 (IQR, 1-3) days, during which time 21 (87.5%) received sedative or
analgesic medications. Delirium in the ICU developed in 183 (81.7%) patients
(ie, the delirium group) for a median of 2 (IQR, 1-3) days, of whom 123 also
were in a coma for a median of 2 (IQR, 1-4) days. Delirium occurred in 77.9%
(60/77) of those without coma and in 83.7% (123/147) of those with coma (P = .29). Overall, patients spent 21.6% of their ICU days
as normal, 43.1% as delirious, and 35.3% as comatose. Of patients who were
alert or easily arousable as measured by a RASS score of 0 or −1, more
than half (54.5%) were delirious.
Sedative and Analgesic Medication Use
Mean daily dose and cumulative administered dose of sedative and narcotic
medications (ie, lorazepam, propofol, morphine, and fentanyl) used in this
cohort are presented in Table 2.
Both mean daily and cumulative doses of these medications were higher in patients
in the delirium group, but only lorazepam was significantly different between
the 2 groups.
Delirium and Associated Clinical Outcomes
Six-Month Mortality. During the 6-month follow-up
period, 34% (63/183) of the patients in the delirium group died vs 15% (6/41)
of the patients in the no delirium group (P = .03)
(Table 3). Figure 3A shows Kaplan-Meier curves of survival to 6 months among
the patients in both groups, with significantly higher mortality among patients
with delirium in the ICU. Figure 3B
further depicts the patients' survival according to both delirium and coma
status.
Using a time-dependent multivariable Cox proportional hazards model
to adjust for all 11 of the covariates (including coma incidence and administration
of sedative and analgesic medications), delirium was associated with a more
than 3-times higher risk of dying by 6 months (Table 3). In an additional analysis (data not shown), time-dependent
cumulative doses of sedatives and narcotics were incorporated into the model,
with similar results compared with the primary analysis. No collinearity was
identified among the covariates used in these analyses (all variance inflation
factors were ≤2, well below the threshold of 10 used to indicate potential
collinearity). To complement the mortality analysis presented in Table 3, a similar analysis that considered
the duration of delirium found that after adjusting for the covariates, each
additional day an ICU patient spent in delirium was associated with a 10%
increased risk of death (HR, 1.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.0-1.3; P = .03).
Hospital Lengths of Stay. Compared with patients
in the no delirium group, those who did develop delirium spent a median of
10 days longer in the hospital overall (Table 3). Figure 4A shows
Kaplan-Meier curves of the probability of remaining in the hospital according
to the clinical distinction of no delirium vs delirium. Figure 4B shows the no delirium and delirium groups further categorized
by coma status, as in Figure 3B.
At any given time during the hospital stay, patients diagnosed with delirium
had an adjusted risk of remaining in the hospital that was twice as high as
those who never developed delirium and a 60% greater risk of remaining in
the wards after ICU discharge (Table 3).
In a separate analysis, time-dependent cumulative doses of sedatives and narcotics
were incorporated into the model with similar results (data not shown) compared
with the primary analysis. To complement the length-of-stay analyses presented
in Table 3, similar analyses that
considered the duration of delirium found that after adjusting for the covariates,
each additional day spent in delirium by an ICU patient was associated with
a 20% and a 10% increased risk of remaining in the hospital or in the wards,
respectively (hospital length of stay: adjusted HR, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.1-1.3; P = .002; post-ICU length of stay: adjusted HR, 1.1; 95%
CI, 1.0-1.2; P = .04).
Secondary Outcomes. Secondary outcomes included
ventilator-free days in the ICU and neurologic impairment at discharge. There
were significantly fewer days alive and free of the ventilator among patients
in the delirium group (median, 19; IQR, 4-23) vs those in the no delirium
group (median, 24; IQR, 19-26) (P<.001). After
adjusting for the 11 covariates, this difference remained significant (P = .03). Cognitive assessments were not available at the
time of hospital discharge for 51 of 179 survivors, due either to inability
to complete testing or to unexpected discharge. One hundred twenty-eight survivors
were tested, of whom 63 (49.2%) had discharge cognitive impairment as defined
in the "Methods" section. Of those tested, twice as many patients in the delirium
group vs the no delirium group exhibited cognitive impairment at hospital
discharge (54.9% [56/102] vs 26.9% [7/26], respectively; P = .01), and multivariable analysis revealed that the patients in
the delirium group were 9 times more likely to be discharged with cognitive
impairment than were those in the no delirium group (adjusted HR, 9.1; 95%
CI, 2.3-35.3; P = .002).
The development of delirium in these mechanically ventilated patients
was associated with a 3-fold increase in risk of death after controlling for
preexisting comorbidities, severity of illness, coma, and the use of sedative
and analgesic medications. While development of coma is well recognized as
a risk factor for death,7,8,10,11 this
investigation is the first to document a strong relationship between delirium
and clinical outcomes after adjusting for coma. These data showed not only
that ever developing this type of organ dysfunction was a predictor of death
by 6 months after ICU discharge, but also that the number of days spent in
a delirious state predicted mortality. In addition, delirium was not simply
a transition state from coma to normal, as delirium occurred just as often
among those who never developed coma as it did among those who did develop
coma at some stage, and persisted in 11% of patients at the time of hospital
discharge.
Monitoring for Delirium in the ICU
In the absence of data linking delirium to outcomes, few ICUs routinely
monitor for delirium. Monitoring for delirium with the CAM-ICU, which is easily
incorporated by nurses into their daily work and takes only 1 to 2 minutes,
could allow the medical team to consider causes and modifications in their
treatment of the patient experiencing this organ dysfunction65,66 (downloadable
materials and discussion available at http://www.icudelirium.org).
We have found during a year-long implementation study incorporating more than
22 000 patient observations that nursing staff readily incorporated such
measurements into routine care,67 in keeping
with recently issued guidelines of the Society of Critical Care Medicine.18
Perhaps the greatest benefit of incorporating delirium monitoring would
be the enhanced detection of the hypoactive delirium subtype, often called
"quiet" delirium because it is characterized by a flat affect or apathy and
often present in otherwise calm and seemingly alert patients.68 This
is in contrast to the readily detected hyperactive delirium that is characterized
by agitation, restlessness, attempting to remove catheters or tubes, hitting,
biting, and emotional lability.68 In this study,
hypoactive delirium was present in over 50% of patients with normal or near-normal
arousal. This type of brain dysfunction may portend a worse prognosis than
hyperactive delirium, accounts for the majority of delirium observations,
and is the most commonly missed subtype of delirium.21,47,68-70
Potentially Modifiable Risk Factors
Our findings suggest that an important opportunity for improving the
care of critically ill patients may be the determination of modifiable risk
factors for delirium in the ICU. Numerous risk factors for delirium have been
identified, including preexisting cognitive impairment; advanced age; use
of psychoactive drugs; mechanical ventilation; untreated pain; and a variety
of medical conditions such as heart failure, prolonged immobilization, abnormal
blood pressure, anemia, sleep deprivation, and sepsis.17,34,71-81
Some of the most readily implemented opportunities for improving care
could be to correct brain ischemia/hypoxemia,82 to
modify the administration of psychoactive medications,78 and
to aggressively treat both underlying infection and the manifestations of
severe sepsis, especially in elderly patients.11,17,83-86 Regarding
hypoxemia, Hopkins et al82 found in 55 mechanically
ventilated patients with acute lung injury that mean oxygen saturations were
below 90% for 122 hours and below 85% for 13 hours per patient. Regarding
use of psychoactive drugs, recent studies87-89 have
shown that reducing unnecessary use of sedatives and analgesics may improve
patients' outcomes. Another approach to intervention would be to treat delirious
patients with procognitive medications such as haloperidol, as recommended
by the Society of Critical Care Medicine guidelines.18 However,
such interventions need to be tested in future research. Our multivariable
analysis did demonstrate that delirium influenced outcomes even after adjusting
for these medications.89 Thus, the development
of delirium was of clinical relevance above and beyond that attributed to
iatrogenic administration of sedative and analgesic medications.
Long-term Cognitive Impairment
At the time of hospital discharge, there was substantial cognitive impairment
in 1 out of every 2 survivors tested, which was significantly more common
among patients who ever developed delirium compared with those who did not.
An important limitation regarding this observation is that the patients were
not tested for the presence of preexisting (ie, prior to ICU admission) cognitive
impairment (a problem not easily resolved due to the emergent nature of these
patients' illnesses). However, we did use a well-validated surrogate assessment
of dementia to estimate and adjust for this possible confounder.
While long-term neuropsychological impairment following mechanical ventilation
is now recognized with increasing frequency,42,82 its
relationship with delirium during ICU stay is not known and deserves further
study. Ongoing delirium has been observed by others, including Levkoff et
al,32 who found that the majority of hospitalized
elderly patients did not experience complete resolution of delirium symptoms
prior to discharge. More recently, McNicoll and colleagues90 reported
that 40% of older ICU patients had ongoing delirium during the post-ICU period,
and Kiely et al91 found that almost 20% of
elderly patients had delirium at the time of admission to postacute facilities.
Limitations and Future Directions
Four limitations of this study should be noted. The first limitation
has to do with the delirium coding and the fact that study protocol mandated
only once-daily CAM-ICU assessments. Assessing patients more often with the
CAM-ICU will help to improve our understanding of the phenomenology of delirium
in these patients. In the year-long implementation study mentioned above,67 nurses adopted delirium monitoring so readily that
they assessed patients more often than the twice-daily requirement. Our coding
of patients as having or not having delirium for a given day has to do with
the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders,
Fourth Edition definition of this disorder. However, it is important
to remember that delirium, by definition, fluctuates over time. Due to the
fluctuating nature of this disorder, it is considered present until cleared
for 24 hours. It would be feasible to code the patients in 12-hour intervals.
Even using such a schema, the delirium "episode" will be considered as ongoing
until there are 2 consecutive 12-hour shifts with negative CAM-ICU assessments.
Second, we did not examine the impact from the broad range of psychoactive
medications other than sedatives and analgesics, patients' pharmacological
interindividual variability in transport and metabolism of medications, or
genetic predisposition to this form of brain injury. Third, while our cohort
did incorporate a broad range of diagnoses in the medical ICU population,
other types of critically ill patients should be investigated, including patients
in trauma and surgical ICUs as well as those with baseline neurologic comorbidities.
Lastly, this observational study was not designed to prove a cause-and-effect
relationship between delirium and clinical outcomes. However, there are data
to support a pathophysiologic rationale for the brain as a potentiator (rather
than merely a marker) of total-body injury during critical illness. The brain
responds to systemic infections and injury with an inflammatory response of
its own that also includes the production of cytokines, cell infiltration,
and tissue damage.92,93 Reports
also indicate that local inflammation in the brain and subsequent activation
of the central nervous system's immune responses are accompanied by peripheral
manifestations of systemic inflammation, including production of large amounts
of peripherally produced tumor necrosis factor α, interleukin 1, and
interferon δ.92,94-96 Such
centrally mediated inflammation could influence the development or resolution
of multiple organ dysfunction syndrome. Direct injury to the central nervous
system induced by intracerebral endotoxin has also been shown to result in
loss of the liver's ability to metabolize drugs independent of intraperitoneally
administered endotoxin.97-99 Thus,
the brain produces its own signaling that likely influences the overall outcome
of the patient. The exact nature of the signaling between the brain and other
systemic organs remains to be elucidated. In the meantime, this study has
demonstrated an important clinical association as well as the need for further
examination, including etiologic and interventional studies.
In this single-center observational study, we found that delirium among
mechanically ventilated patients in the ICU was associated with higher 6-month
mortality and longer lengths of stay even after adjusting for numerous covariates.
This study raises the question of how diligently delirium should be monitored
in acutely ill patients, especially considering that validated instruments
can be implemented with a high degree of reproducibility and rates of compliance
at the bedside by those routinely caring for patients in the ICU. Some recent
systematic reviews of sedation practices and their consequences in the ICU
have not mentioned delirium,100,101 while
others have suggested that missing delirium in acutely ill patients should
be considered a medical error.25 Future studies
are needed to determine whether prevention or treatment of delirium would
change clinical outcomes including mortality, length of stay, cost of care,
and long-term neuropsychological outcomes among survivors of critical illness.
1.Schmitz R, Lantin M, White A. Future Needs in Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine. Cambridge, Mass: Abt Associates; 1998.
2.Angus DC, Linde-Zwirble WT, Clermonte G, Carcillo J, Pinsky MR. Epidemiology of severe sepsis in the United States: analysis of incidence,
outcome, and associated costs of care.
Crit Care Med.2001;29:1303-1310.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11445675&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 3.Luhr OR, Karlsson M, Thorsteinsson A, Rylander C, Frostell CG. The impact of respiratory variables on mortality in non-ARDS and ARDS
patients requiring mechanical ventilation.
Intensive Care Med.2000;26:508-517.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10923723&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 4.Montgomery AB, Stager MA, Carrico CJ, Hudson LD. Causes of mortality in patients with the adult respiratory distress
syndrome.
Am Rev Respir Dis.1985;132:485-489.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=4037521&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 5.Ely EW, Wheeler AP, Thompson BT, Ancuklewicz M, Steinberg KP, Bernard GR. Recovery rate and prognosis in older persons who develop acute lung
injury and the acute respiratory distress syndrome.
Ann Intern Med.2002;136:25-36.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11777361&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 6.Esteban A, Anzueto A, Alia I.
et al. Indications for, complications from, and outcome of mechanical ventilation:
effect of age.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med.2000;161:A385.Google Scholar 7.Knaus WA, Draper EA, Wagner DP, Zimmerman JE. APACHE II: a severity of disease classification system.
Crit Care Med.1985;13:818-829.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=3928249&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 8.Ferreira FL, Peres Bota D, Bross A, Melot C, Vincent JL. Serial evaluation of the SOFA score to predict outcome in critically
ill patients.
JAMA.2001;286:1754-1758.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11594901&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 9.Young GB, Bolton CF, Archibald YM, Austin TW, Wells GA. The electroencephalogram in sepsis-associated encephalopathy.
J Clin Neurophysiol.1992;9:145-152.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=1552002&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 10.Sprung CL, Peduzzi PN, Shatney CH.
et al. The impact of encephalopathy on mortality in the sepsis syndrome: the
Veterans Administration Systematic Sepsis Cooperative Study Group.
Crit Care Med.1990;18:801-806.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=2379391&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 11.Eidelman LA, Putterman D, Putterman C, Sprung CL. The spectrum of septic encephalopathy: definitions, etiologies, and
mortalities.
JAMA.1996;275:470-473.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=8627969&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 12.Papadopoulos MC, Davies DC, Moss RF, Tighe D, Bennett ED. Pathophysiology of septic encephalopathy: a review.
Crit Care Med.2000;28:3019-3024.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10966289&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 13.Bleck TP, Smith MC, Pierre-Louis SJ, Jares JJ, Murray J, Hansen CA. Neurologic complications of critical medical illnesses.
Crit Care Med.1993;21:98-103.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=8420739&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 14.Ely EW, Siegel MD, Inouye S. Delirium in the intensive care unit: an under-recognized syndrome of
organ dysfunction.
Semin Respir Crit Care Med.2001;22:115-126.Google Scholar 15.McGuire BE, Basten CJ, Ryan CJ, Gallagher J. Intensive care unit syndrome: a dangerous misnomer.
Arch Intern Med.2000;160:906-909.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10761954&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 16.Geary SM. Intensive care unit psychosis revisited: understanding and managing
delirium in the critical care setting.
Crit Care Nurs Q.1994;17:51-63.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=8180848&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 17.Inouye SK, Bogardus ST, Charpentier PA.
et al. A multicomponent intervention to prevent delirium in hospitalized older
patients.
N Engl J Med.1999;340:669-676.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10053175&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 18.Jacobi J, Fraser GL, Coursin DB.
et al. Clinical practice guidelines for the sustained use of sedatives and
analgesics in the critically ill adult.
Crit Care Med.2002;30:119-141.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11902253&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 19.Ely EW, Stephens RK, Jackson JC.
et al. Current opinions regarding the importance, diagnosis, and management
of delirium in the intensive care unit: a survey of 912 healthcare professionals.
Crit Care Med.2004;32:106-112.Google Scholar 20.Lipowski ZJ. Delirium in the elderly patient.
N Engl J Med.1989;320:578-582.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=2644535&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 21.Meagher DJ, Hanlon DO, Mahony EO, Casey PR, Trzepacz PT. Relationship between symptoms and motoric subtype of delirium.
J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci.2000;12:51-56.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10678513&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 22.Inouye SK. The dilemma of delirium: clinical and research controversies regarding
diagnosis and evaluation of delirium in hospitalized elderly medical patients.
Am J Med.1994;97:278-288.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=8092177&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 23.Gustafson Y, Brannstorm B, Norberg G.
et al. Underdiagnosis and poor documentation of acute confusional states in
elderly hip fracture patients.
J Am Geriatr Soc.1991;39:760-765.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=2071806&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 24.Inouye SK, Foreman MD, Mion LC, Katz KH, Cooney LM. Nurses' recognition of delirium and its symptoms.
Arch Intern Med.2001;161:2467-2473.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11700159&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 25.Sanders AB. Missed delirium in older emergency department patients: a quality-of-care
problem.
Ann Emerg Med.2002;39:338-341.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11867994&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 26.Inouye SK, van Dyck CH, Alessi CA, Balkin S, Siegal AP, Horowitz RI. Clarifying confusion: the confusion assessment method.
Ann Intern Med.1990;113:941-948.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=2240918&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 27.Rockwood K, Cosway S, Carver D, Jarrett P, Stadnyk K, Fisk J. The risk of dementia and death after delirium.
Age Ageing.1999;28:551-556.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10604507&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 28.Rabins PV, Folstein MF. Delirium and dementia: diagnostic criteria and fatality rates.
Br J Psychiatry.1982;140:149-153.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=7074297&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 29.Inouye SK, Schlesinger MJ, Lyndon TJ. Delirium: a symptom of how hospital care is failing older persons and
a window to improve quality of hospital care.
Am J Med.1999;106:565-573.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10335730&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 30.Francis J, Kapoor WN. Prognosis after hospital discharge of older medical patients with delirium.
J Am Geriatr Soc.1992;40:601-606.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=1587979&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 31.McCusker J, Cole M, Abrahamowicz M, Primeau F, Belzile E. Delirium predicts 12-month mortality.
Arch Intern Med.2002;162:457-463.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11863480&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 32.Levkoff SE, Evans DA, Liptzin B.
et al. Delirium: the occurrence and persistence of symptoms among elderly
hospitalized patients.
Arch Intern Med.1992;152:334-340.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=1739363&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 33.Lawlor PG, Gagnon B, Mancini IL.
et al. Occurrence, causes, and outcome of delirium in patients with advanced
cancer: a prospective study.
Arch Intern Med.2000;160:786-794.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10737278&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 34.Marcantonio ER, Goldman L, Mangione CM.
et al. A clinical prediction rule for delirium after elective noncardiac surgery.
JAMA.1994;271:134-139.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=8264068&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 35.Riker R, Picard JT, Fraser G. Prospective evaluation of the sedation-agitation scale for adult critically
ill patients.
Crit Care Med.1999;27:1325-1329.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10446827&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 36.Sessler CN, Gosnell M, Grap MJ.
et al. The Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale: validity and reliability in
adult intensive care patients.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med.2002;166:1338-1344.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12421743&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 37.Ely EW, Truman B, Shintani A.
et al. Monitoring sedation status over time in ICU patients: reliability and
validity of the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS).
JAMA.2003;289:2983-2991.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12799407&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 38.Bergeron N, Dubois MJ, Dumont M, Dial S, Skrobik Y. Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist: evaluation of a new screening
tool.
Intensive Care Med.2001;27:859-864.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11430542&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 39.Ely EW, Inouye SK, Bernard GR.
et al. Delirium in mechanically ventilated patients: validity and reliability
of the confusion assessment method for the intensive care unit (CAM-ICU).
JAMA.2001;286:2703-2710.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11730446&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 40.Ely EW, Margolin R, Francis J.
et al. Evaluation of delirium in critically ill patients: validation of the
confusion assessment method for the intensive care unit (CAM-ICU).
Crit Care Med.2001;29:1370-1379.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11445689&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 41.Ely EW, Gautam S, Margolin R.
et al. The impact of delirium in the intensive care unit on hospital length
of stay.
Intensive Care Med.2001;27:1892-1900.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11797025&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 42.Jackson JC, Hart RP, Gordon SM.
et al. Six-month neuropsychological outcome of medical intensive care unit
patients.
Crit Care Med.2003;31:1226-1234.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12682497&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 43.Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, Ciol MA. Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with
ICD-9-CM administrative databases.
J Clin Epidemiol.1992;45:613-619.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=1607900&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 44.Katz S, Ford AB, Moskowitz RW, Jackson BA, Jaffe MW. Studies of illness in the aged: the index of ADL: a standardized measure
of biological and psychosocial function.
JAMA.1963;185:94-99.Google Scholar 45.Blessed G, Tomlinson BE, Roth M. The association between quantitative measures of dementia and of senile
change in the cerebral grey matter of elderly subjects.
Br J Psychiatry.1968;114:797-811.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=5662937&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 46.Wijdicks EFM. Neurologic Complications of Critical Illness. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2002.
47.Meagher DJ. Delirium: optimising management.
BMJ.2001;322:144-149.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11159573&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 48.American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders,
Fourth Edition. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 1994:123-133.
49.Schoenfeld DA, Bernard GR.ARDS Network. Statistical evaluation of ventilator-free days as an efficacy measure
in clinical trials of treatments for acute respiratory distress syndrome.
Crit Care Med.2002;30:1772-1777.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12163791&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 50.Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. "Mini-mental state": a practical method for grading the cognitive state
of patients for the clinician.
J Psychiatr Res.1975;12:189-198.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=1202204&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 51.O'Connor DW, Pollitt PA, Hyde JB.
et al. The reliability and validity of the Mini-Mental State in a British
community survey.
J Psychiatr Res.1989;23:87-96.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=2666647&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 52.Lorentz WJ, Scanlan JM, Boorson S. Brief screening tests for dementia.
Can J Psychiatry.2002;47:723-733.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12420650&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 53.Tangalos EG, Smith GE, Ivnik RJ.
et al. The Mini-Mental State Examination in general medical practice: clinical
utility and acceptance.
Mayo Clin Proc.1996;71:829-837.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=8790257&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 54.Cammarano WB, Drasner K, Katz J. Pain control, sedation, and use of muscle relaxants. In: Hall JB, Schmidt GA, Wood LD, eds. Principles
of Critical Care Medicine. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Publishers; 1998:90-97.
55.Peto R, Peto J. Asymptotically efficient rank invariant test procedures.
J Biometrics.1972;26:579-581.Google Scholar 56.Cox DR. Regression models and life-tables.
J R Stat Soc.1972;34:187-220.Google Scholar 57.Crowley J, Hu M. Covariance analysis of heart transplant survival data.
J Am Stat Assoc.1977;72:27-36.Google Scholar 58.Therneau TM, Grambsch PM. Modeling Survival Data: Extending the Cox Model. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag; 2000.
59.Vincent JL, Moreno R, Takala J.
et al. for the Working Group on Sepsis-Related Problems of the European Society
of Intensive Care Medicine. The SOFA (Sepsis-Related Organ Failure Assessment) score to describe
organ dysfunction/failure.
Intensive Care Med.1996;22:707-710.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=8844239&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 60.Vincent JL, Mendonca Ad, Cantraine F.
et al. Working Group on Sepsis-Related Problems of the European Society of
Intensive Care Medicine. Use of the SOFA score to assess the incidence of organ dysfunction/failure
in intensive care units: results of a multicenter, prospective study.
Crit Care Med.1998;26:1793-1800.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9824069&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 61.Kleinbaum DG, Kupper LL, Muller KE. Applied Regression Analysis and Other Multivariable
Methods. Belmont, Calif: Duxbury Press; 1988:210-211.
62.Trujillo KA, Akil H. Opiate tolerance and dependence: recent findings and synthesis.
New Biol.1991;3:915-923.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=1662985&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 63.Vinik HR, Kissin I. Rapid development of tolerance to analgesia during remifentanil infusion
in humans.
Anesth Analg.1998;86:1307-1311.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9620525&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 64.Eilers H, Philip LA, Bickler PE, McKay WR, Schumacher MA. The reversal of fentanyl-induced tolerance by administration of "small-dose"
ketamine.
Anesth Analg.2001;93:213-214.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11429368&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 65.American Psychiatric Association. Practice guidelines for the treatment of patients with delirium.
Am J Psychiatry.1999;156(suppl):1-20.Google Scholar 67.Truman B, Shintani A, Jackson J, Peterson JF, Thomason J, Ely EW. Implementation of the SCCM guidelines for sedation and delirium monitoring
in the ICU.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med.2003;167:A969.Google Scholar 68.Truman B, Ely EW. Monitoring delirium in critically ill patients.
Crit Care Nurse.2003;23:25-36.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12725193&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 69.Camus V, Burtin B, Simeone I, Schwed P, Gonthier R, Dubos G. Factor analysis supports the evidence of existing hyperactive and hypoactive
subtypes of delirium.
Int J Geriatr Psychiatry.2000;15:313-316.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10767730&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 70.Peterson JF, Truman BL, Shintani A, Thomason JWW, Jackson JC, Ely EW. The prevalence of hypoactive, hyperactive, and mixed-type delirium
in medical ICU patients.
J Am Geriatr Soc.2003;51:S174.Google Scholar 71.Inouye SK, Charpentier PA. Precipitating factors for delirium in hospitalized elderly persons:
predictive model and interrelationship with baseline vulnerability.
JAMA.1996;275:852-857.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=8596223&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 72.Marcantonio ER, Juarez G, Goldman L.
et al. The relationship of postoperative delirium with psychoactive medications.
JAMA.1994;272:1518-1522.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=7966844&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 73.Elie M, Cole MG, Primeau FJ, Bellavance F. Delirium risk factors in elderly hospitalized patients.
J Gen Intern Med.1998;13:204-212.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9541379&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 74.Litaker D, Locala J, Franco K, Bronson DL, Tannous Z. Preoperative risk factors for postoperative delirium.
Gen Hosp Psychiatry.2001;23:84-89.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11313076&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 75.Rahkonen T, Eloniemi-Sulkava U, Halonen P.
et al. Delirium in the non-demented oldest old in the general population:
risk factors and prognosis.
Int J Geriatr Psychiatry.2001;16:415-421.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11333430&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 76.Rolfson DB, McElhaney JE, Rockwood K.
et al. Incidence and risk factors for delirium and other adverse outcomes
in older adults after coronary artery bypass graft surgery.
Can J Cardiol.1999;15:771-776.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10411615&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 77.Schor JD, Levkoff SE, Lipsitz LA.
et al. Risk factors for delirium in hospitalized elderly.
JAMA.1992;267:827-831.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=1732655&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 78.Dubois MJ, Bergeron N, Dumont M, Dial S, Skrobik Y. Delirium in an intensive care unit: a study of risk factors.
Intensive Care Med.2001;27:1297-1304.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11511942&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 79.Aldemir M, Ozen S, Kara IH, Sir A, Bac B. Predisposing factors for delirium in the surgical intensive care unit.
Crit Care.2001;5:265-270.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11737901&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 80.Granberg A, Malmros CW, Bergbom IL, Lundberg D. Intensive care unit syndrome/delirium is associated with anemia, drug
therapy and duration of ventilation treatment.
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand.2002;46:726-731.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12059899&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 81.Morrrison RS, Magaziner J, Gilbert M.
et al. Relationship between pain and opioid analgesics on the development
of delirium following hip fracture.
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci.2003;58:76-81.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12560416&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 82.Hopkins RO, Weaver LK, Pope D, Orme JF, Bigler ED, Larson-Lohr V. Neuropsychological sequelae and impaired health status in survivors
of severe acute respiratory distress syndrome.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med.1999;160:50-56.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10390379&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 83.Ely EW, Angus DC, Williams MD, Bates B, Qualy R, Bernard GR. Drotrecogin alfa (activated) treatment of older patients with severe
sepsis.
Clin Infect Dis.2003;37:187-195.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12856210&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 84.Bernard GR, Vincent JL, Laterre PF.
et al. Efficacy and safety of recombinant human activated protein c for severe
sepsis.
N Engl J Med.2001;344:699-709.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11236773&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 85.Rivers E, Nguyen B, Havstad S.
et al. Early goal-directed therapy in the treatment of severe sepsis and septic
shock.
N Engl J Med.2001;345:1368-1377.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11794169&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 86.Vincent JL, Abraham E, Annane D, Bernard G, Rivers E, Van Den Berghe G. Reducing mortality in sepsis: new directions.
Crit Care.2002;6:S1-S18.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12720570&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 87.Kollef MH, Levy NT, Ahrens T, Schaiff R, Prentice D, Sherman G. The use of continuous IV sedation is associated with prolongation of
mechanical ventilation.
Chest.1999;114:541-548.Google Scholar 88.Brook AD, Ahrens TS, Schaiff R.
et al. Effect of a nursing-implemented sedation protocol on the duration of
mechanical ventilation.
Crit Care Med.1999;27:2609-2615.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10628598&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 89.Kress JP, Pohlman AS, O'Connor MF, Hall JB. Daily interruption of sedative infusions in critically ill patients
undergoing mechanical ventilation.
N Engl J Med.2000;342:1471-1477.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10816184&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 90.McNicoll L, Pisani MA, Zhang Y, Ely EW, Siegel MD, Inouye SK. Delirium in the intensive care unit: occurrence and clinical course
in older patients.
J Am Geriatr Soc.2003;51:591-598.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12752832&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 91.Kiely DK, Bergmann MA, Murphy KM, Jones RN, Orav EJ, Marcantonio ER. Delirium among newly admitted postacute facility patients: prevalence,
symptoms, and severity.
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci.2003;58:M441-M445.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12730254&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 92.Perry VH, Andersson B, Gordon S. Macrophages and inflammation in the central nervous system.
Trends Neurosci.1993;16:268-273.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=7689770&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 93.Rothwell NJ, Luheshi G, Toulmond S. Cytokines and their receptors in the central nervous system: physiology,
pharmacology and pathology.
Pharmacol Ther.1996;69:85-95.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=8984509&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 94.Woiciechowsky C, Asudullah K, Nestler D.
et al. Sympathetic activation triggers systemic interleukin-10 release in
immunodepression induced by brain injury.
Nat Med.1998;4:808-813.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9662372&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 95.Woiciechowsky C, Schoening B, Daberkow N.
et al. Brain IL-1 beta induces local inflammation but systemic anti-inflammatory
response through stimulation of both hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis and
sympathetic nervous system.
Brain Res.1999;816:563-571.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9878881&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 96.Nicholson TE, Renton KW. The role of cytokines in the depression of CYP1A activity using cultured
astrocytes as an in vitro model of inflammation in the CNS.
Drug Metab Dispos.2002;30:42-46.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11744610&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 97.Renton KW, Nicholson TE. Hepatic and central nervous system cytochrome P450 are down-regulated
during lipopolysaccharide-evoked localized inflammation in brain.
J Pharmacol Exp Ther.2000;294:524-530.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10900228&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 98.Shimamoto Y, Kitamura H, Hoshi H.
et al. Differential alterations in levels of hepatic microsomal cytochrome
P450 isozymes following intracerebroventricular injection of bacterial lipopolysaccharide
in rats.
Arch Toxicol.1998;72:492-498.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9765064&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 99.Shimamoto Y, Kitamura H, Iwai M, Saito M, Kazusaka A, Fujita S. Mechanism of decrease in levels of hepatic P450 isozymes induced by
intracerebral endotoxin: independence from sympathetic nervous and adrenocortical
systems.
Arch Toxicol.1999;73:41-49.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10207613&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 100.Ostermann ME, Keenan SP, Seiferling RA, Sibbald W. Sedation in the intensive care unit.
JAMA.2000;283:1451-1459.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10732935&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar 101.Shapiro BA, Warren J, Egol A.
et al. Practice parameters for intravenous analgesia and sedation for adult
patients in the intensive care unit: an executive summary.
Crit Care Med.1995;23:1596-1600.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=7664563&dopt=Abstract
Google Scholar