Detecting and treating delirium—key interventions you may be missing

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 01/14/2019 - 11:32
Display Headline
Detecting and treating delirium—key interventions you may be missing

PRACTICE RECOMMENDATIONS

Nonpharmacologic interventions are the mainstay of treatment for delirium. B

When medication is needed, atypical antipsychotics are as effective as typical antipsychotics for treating delirium in elderly patients, and have fewer side effects. B

Benzodiazepines should be avoided in elderly patients with delirium that is not associated with alcohol withdrawal. A

Strength of recommendation (SOR)

A Good-quality patient-oriented evidence
B Inconsistent or limited-quality patient-oriented evidence
C Consensus, usual practice, opinion, disease-oriented evidence, case series

CASE Mr. D, a 75-year-old patient with a history of hypertension and congestive heart failure, sustained a femoral neck fracture and was admitted to the hospital for surgery. He underwent open reduction and internal fixation and was doing well postoperatively, until Day 2—when his primary care physician made morning rounds and noted that Mr. D was somnolent. The nurse on duty assured the physician that Mr. D was fine and “was awake and alert earlier,” and attributed his somnolence to the oxycodone (10 mg) the patient was taking for pain. The physician ordered a reduction in dosage.

If Mr. D had been your patient, would you have considered other possible causes of his somnolence? Or do you think the physician’s action was sufficient?

Derived from Latin, the word delirium literally means “off the [ploughed] track.”1 Dozens of terms have been used to describe delirium, with acute confusion state, organic brain syndrome, acute brain syndrome, and toxic psychosis among them.

Delirium has been reported to occur in 15% to 30% of patients on general medical units,2 about 40% of postoperative patients, and up to 70% of terminally ill patients.3 The true prevalence is hard to determine, as up to 66% of cases may be missed.4

Delirium is being diagnosed more frequently, however—a likely result of a growing geriatric population, increased longevity, and greater awareness of the condition. Each year, an estimated 2.3 million US residents are affected, leading to prolonged hospitalization; poor functional outcomes; the development or worsening of dementia; increased nursing home placement; and a significant burden for families and the US health care system.5

Delirium is also associated with an increase in mortality.6,7 The mortality rate among hospitalized patients who develop delirium is reported to be 18%, rising to an estimated 47% within the first 3 months after discharge.6 Greater awareness of risk factors, rapid recognition of signs and symptoms of delirium, and early intervention—detailed in the text and tables that follow—will lead to better outcomes.

Assessing risk, evaluating mental status

In addition to advanced age, risk factors for delirium (TABLE 1)8-14 include alcohol use, brain dysfunction, comorbidities, hypertension, malignancy, anticholinergic medications, anemia, metabolic abnormalities, and male sex. In patients who, like Mr. D, have numerous risk factors, early—and frequent—evaluation of mental status is needed. One way to do this is to treat mental status as a vital sign, to be included in the assessment of every elderly patient.15

The Confusion Assessment Method, a quick and easy-to-use delirium screening tool (TABLE 2), has a sensitivity of 94% to 100% and a specificity of 90% to 95%.16,17 There are a number of other screening tools, including the widely used Mini-Mental State Exam (MMSE), as well as the Delirium Rating Scale, Delirium Symptom Interview, and Delirium Severity Scale.

TABLE 1
Risk factors for delirium
8-14

Advanced age

Alcohol use

Brain dysfunction (dementia, epilepsy)

Hypertension

Male sex

Malignancy

Medications (mainly anticholinergic)

Metabolic abnormalities:

  • - Na <130 or >150 mEq/L
  • - Glucose <60 or >300 mg/dL
  • - BUN/Cr ratio >20

Old age

Preoperative anemia

Preoperative metabolic abnormalities

BUN, blood urea nitrogen; Cr, creatinine; Na, sodium.

TABLE 2
Screening for delirium: The Confusion Assessment Method*
16,17

CriteriaEvidence
Yes to questions 1, 2, and 3 plus 4 or 5 (or both) suggests a delirium diagnosis
1. Acute onsetIs there evidence of an acute change in mental status from the patient’s baseline?
2. Fluctuating courseDid the abnormal behavior fluctuate during the day—ie, tend to come and go or increase and decrease in severity?
3. InattentionDid the patient have difficulty focusing attention, eg, being easily distractible or having difficulty keeping track of what was being said?
PLUS 
4. Disorganized thinkingWas the patient’s thinking disorganized or incoherent, such as rambling or irrelevant conversation, unclear or illogical flow of ideas, or unpredictable switching from subject to subject?
5. Altered level of consciousnessWould you rate the patient’s level of consciousness as (any of the following):
– Vigilant (hyperalert)
– Lethargic (drowsy, easily aroused)
– Stupor (difficult to arouse)
– Coma (unarousable)
*CAM shortened version worksheet.
Adapted from: Inouye SK et al. Clarifying confusion: the Confusion Assessment Method. A new method for detection of delirium. Ann Intern Med. 1990;113:941-948; Inouye SK. Confusion Assessment Method (CAM): Training Manual and Coding Guide. Copyright 2003, Hospital Elder Life Program, LLC.
 

 

Arriving at a delirium diagnosis

The clinical presentation of delirium is characterized by acute—and reversible—impairment of cognition, attention, orientation, and memory, and disruption of the normal sleep/wake cycle. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV-TR) criteria for a delirium diagnosis include all of the following:

  • disturbance of consciousness, with a reduced ability to focus, sustain, or shift attention
  • change in cognition, or a perceptual disturbance, that is not accounted for by a preexisting or developing dementia
  • rapid onset of cognitive impairment, with fluctuation likely during the course of the day
  • evidence from the history, physical exam, or laboratory findings that the disturbed consciousness is a direct physiological consequence of a general medical condition.17

There are 3 basic types of delirium, each associated with a different psychomotor disturbance.

  1. Hyperactive delirium—the least common—is characterized by restlessness and agitation, and is therefore the easiest to diagnose.
  2. Hypoactive delirium is characterized by psychomotor retardation and hypoalertness. It is often misdiagnosed as depression, and has the poorest prognosis.
  3. Mixed delirium—the most common—is characterized by symptoms that fluctuate between hyper- and hypoactivity.18

CASE By lunchtime, Mr. D had awakened; however, he needed help with his meal. After eating, he slept for the rest of the day. At night, a nurse paged the resident to report that the patient’s blood pressure was 82/60 mm Hg and his heart rate was 115. The physician ordered an intravenous fluid bolus, which corrected the patient’s hypotension, but only temporarily.

The fluctuating nature of delirium—most notably, in patients’ level of alertness—is helpful in establishing a diagnosis. The history and physical exam are the gold standard tools, both for diagnosing delirium and identifying the underlying cause (TABLE 3).19,20 A review of the patient’s medications should be a key component of the medical history, as drugs—particularly those with anticholinergic properties—are often associated with delirium. Environmental shifts, including hospitalization and a disruption of the normal sleep/wake cycle, endocrine disorders, infection, and nutritional deficiencies are also potential causes of delirium, among others.

If history and physical exam fail to identify the underlying cause, laboratory testing, including complete blood count, complete metabolic profile, and urinalysis, should be done. Brain imaging is usually not needed for individuals with symptoms of delirium, but computed tomography (CT) may be indicated if a patient’s condition continues to deteriorate while the underlying cause remains unidentified.21 Electroencephalography (EEG) may be used to confirm a delirium diagnosis that’s uncertain, in a patient with underlying dementia, for instance. (In more than 16% of cases of delirium, the cause is unknown.22)

The most common structural abnormalities found in patients with delirium are brain atrophy and increased white matter lesions, as well as basal ganglia lesions.23 Single-photon emission CT (SPECT) shows a reduction of regional cerebral perfusion by 50%,24 while EEG shows slowing of the posterior dominant rhythm and increased generalized slow-wave activity.25

TABLE 3
A DELIRIUM mnemonic to get to the heart of the problem
19,20

CauseComment
DrugsDrug classes: Anesthesia, anticholinergics, anticonvulsants, antiemetics, antihistamines, antihypertensives, antimicrobials, antipsychotics, benzodiazepines, corticosteroids, hypnotics, H2 blockers, muscle relaxants, NSAIDs, opioids, SSRIs, tricyclic antidepressants Drugs: digoxin, levodopa, lithium, theophylline OTCs: henbane, Jimson weed, mandrake, Atropa belladonna extract
EnvironmentalChange of environment, sensory deprivation, sleep deprivation
EndocrineHyperparathyroidism, hyper-/hypothyroidism
Low perfusionMI, pulmonary embolism, CVA
InfectionPneumonia, sepsis, systemic infection, UTI
RetentionFecal impaction, urinary retention
IntoxicationAlcohol, illegal drugs/drug overdose
UndernutritionMalnutrition, thiamin deficiency, vitamin B12 deficiency
MetabolicAcid-base disturbances, fluid and electrolyte abnormalities, hepatic or uremic encephalopathy, hypercarbia, hyper-/hypoglycemia, hyperosmolality, hypoxia
SubduralHistory of falls
CVA, cerebrovascular accident; MI, myocardial infarction; NSAIDs, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs; OTCs, over-the-counter agents; SSRIs, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors; UTI, urinary tract infection.

Treating (or preventing) delirium: Start with these steps

Nonpharmacologic interventions are the mainstay of treatment for patients with delirium, and may also help to prevent the development of delirium in patients at risk. One key measure is to correct, or avoid, disruptions in the patient’s normal sleep/wake cycle—eg, restoring circadian rhythm by avoiding,
to the extent possible, awakening the patient at night for medication or vital signs. Preventing sensory deprivation, by ensuring that the patient’s eyeglasses and hearing aid are nearby and that there is a clock and calendar nearby and adequate light, is also helpful. Other key interventions (TABLE 4)26-28 include:

  • limiting medications associated with delirium (and eliminating any nonessential medication)
  • improving nutrition and ambulation
  • correcting electrolyte and fluid disturbances
  • treating infection
  • involving family members in patient care
  • ensuring that patients receive adequate pain management
  • avoiding transfers (if the patient is hospitalized) and trying to secure a single room.
 

 

Several studies have evaluated the effectiveness of nonpharmacologic interventions in preventing or lowering the incidence of delirium. A large multicomponent delirium prevention study of patients >70 years on general medical units focused on managing risk factors. The interventions studied included (1) avoidance of sensory deprivation, (2) early mobilization, (3) treating dehydration, (4) implementing noise reduction strategies and sleep enhancement programs, and (5) avoiding the use of sleep medications. These interventions proved to be effective not only in lowering the incidence of delirium, but in shortening the duration of delirium in affected patients (NNT=20).27

One study found that proactively using a geriatric consultation model (ie, implementing standardized protocols for the management of 6 risk factors) for elderly hospitalized patients led to a reduction in the incidence of delirium by more than a third.26 Admission to a specialized geriatric unit is associated with a lower incidence of delirium compared with being hospitalized on a general medical unit.29

Reducing the incidence of postoperative delirium. Bright light therapy (a light intensity of 5000 lux with a distance from the light source of 100 cm), implemented postoperatively, may play a role in reducing the incidence of delirium, research suggests.30 Music may be helpful, as well. An RCT involving patients (>65 years) undergoing elective knee or hip surgery found that those who listened to classical music postoperatively had a lower incidence of delirium.31 Similarly, playing music in nursing homes has been shown to decrease aggressive behavior and agitation.32

TABLE 4
Helpful interventions in the hospital or at home
26-28

  • Avoid sensory deprivation (provide hearing aids, eyeglasses, clock, calendar, adequate light)
  • Avoid patient transfers; consider using private rooms
  • Be especially vigilant in monitoring for postoperative complications/infection
  • Eliminate nonessential medications
  • Get patients out of bed as soon as possible
  • Ensure that nurses identify patients at risk and use delirium screening tools
  • Institute measures, as needed, to prevent fecal impaction and urinary retention
  • Institute more frequent checks to ensure adequate oxygen delivery
  • Involve family and caregivers in patient care
  • Prevent or provide early treatment of dehydration
  • Provide adequate nutrition
  • Provide adequate pain management (with scheduled pain management protocol)
  • Reduce noise
  • Seek early geriatric or geropsychiatric consult
  • Take steps to restore normal sleep/wake cycle (eg, avoid nighttime disturbances for medications or vital signs, whenever possible)

When medication is needed, proceed with caution

None of the medications currently used to treat delirium are approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for this indication, and many of them have substantial side effects. Nonetheless, palliative or symptomatic treatment requires some form of sedation for agitated patients with delirium. Thus, it is necessary to strike a balance in order to manage the symptoms of delirium and avoid potential side effects (primarily, sedation). Overly sedating patients can confuse the clinical picture of delirium and make it difficult to differentiate between ongoing delirium and medication side effects. Medication should be started at a low, but frequent, dose to achieve an effective therapeutic level, after which a lower maintenance dose can be used until the cause of delirium is resolved.

Antipsychotics are the cornerstone of drug treatment
Haloperidol has traditionally been used to treat delirium33 and has proven effectiveness. However, it is associated with increased risk of extrapyramidal manifestations compared with atypical antipsychotics.

Atypical antipsychotics (olanzapine, risperidone, quetiapine) are increasingly being used to treat delirium because they have fewer extrapyramidal side effects.34 With the exception of olanzapine (available in intramuscular and oral disintegrating form), atypical antipsychotics are available only in oral form, which may limit their usefulness as a treatment for agitated, delirious patients.

Risperidone (at a dose ranging from 0.25 to 1 mg/d) and olanzapine (1.25 to 2.5 mg/d) have shown similar efficacy to haloperidol (0.75 to 1.5 mg/d) in both the prevention and treatment of delirium, but with fewer extrapyramidal side effects.35-39 Quetiapine, a second-generation antipsychotic, is widely used to treat inpatient delirium, although there are no large RCTs comparing it with placebo. One pilot study and another open-label trial found the drug to be beneficial for patients with delirium, with fewer extrapyramidal side effects than haloperidol.40,41

Do a risk-benefit analysis. The use of antipsychotics in elderly patients with delirium has been associated with increased morbidity and mortality. The incidence of stroke and death were higher for community-dwelling patients (NNH=100) and patients in long-term care (N=67) who received typical or atypical antipsychotics for 6 months compared with that of patients who did not receive any antipsychotics.42,43 Thus, a risk-benefit analysis should be done before prescribing antipsychotics for elderly patients. Both typical and atypical antipsychotics carry black box warnings of increased mortality rates in the elderly.

 

 

Other drugs for delirium? More research is needed
Cholinesterase inhibitors. Procholinergic agents would be expected to be helpful in treating delirium, as cholinergic deficiency has been implicated as a predisposing factor for delirium and medications with anticholinergic effects have been shown to induce delirium. However, several studies of cholinesterase inhibitors have not found this to be the case.44-47

Benzodiazepines. There is no evidence to support the use of benzodiazepines in the treatment of delirium, except when the delirium is related to alcohol withdrawal.48 When indicated, the use of a short-acting benzodiazepine such as lorazepam is preferred for elderly patients (vs long-acting agents like diazepam) because of its shorter half-life and better side effect profile.2 Drowsiness, ataxia, and disinhibition are common side effects of benzodiazepines.

Gabapentin. A pilot study conducted to assess the efficacy of gabapentin (900 mg/d) for the prevention of postoperative delirium found a significantly lower incidence of delirium among patients who received gabapentin compared with placebo. This may be associated with gabapentin’s opioid-sparing effect.49 Larger studies are needed to recommend for or against the use of gabapentin in patients receiving opiates.

Further study of the pathophysiology of delirium is needed, as well, to increase our ability to prevent and treat it.

CASE After receiving the IV fluid bolus, Mr. D became increasingly short of breath and required more oxygen to keep his oxygen saturation in the 90s. Labs were ordered during morning rounds, and the patient was found to have urosepsis. He was admitted to the ICU in septic shock, and was intubated and died several days later.

In retrospect, it was determined that Mr. D had developed hypoactive delirium brought on by the infection—and that his somnolence on the second postoperative day was not a sign of overmedication. Had this been recognized early on through the use of an appropriate screening tool, the outcome would likely have been more favorable.

CORRESPONDENCE Abdulraouf Ghandour, MD, Green Meadows Clinic University Physicians, 3217 Providence Road, Columbia, MO 65203; Ghandour78@gmail.com

References

1. Casselman WG. Dictionary of Medical Derivations. The Real Meaning of Medical Terms. New York, NY: Informa Healthcare; 1998.

2. Kiely DK, Bergmann MA, Murphy KM, et al. Delirium among newly admitted postacute facility patients, prevalence, symptoms, and severity. J Gerontol Biol Sci Med Sci. 2003;58:M441-M445.

3. Inouye SK, Charpentier PA. Precipitating factors for delirium in hospitalized elderly persons. Predictive model and interrelationship with baseline vulnerability. JAMA. 1996;275:852-857.

4. 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.

5. Pompei P, Foreman M, Rudberg M, et al. Delirium in hospitalized older persons: outcomes and predictors. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1994;42:809-815.

6. Kolbeinsson H, Jonsson A. Delirium and dementia in acute medical admissions of elderly patients in Iceland. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1993;87:123-127.

7. Cole MG, Primeau FJ. Prognosis of delirium in elderly hospital patients. CMAJ. 1993;149:41-46.

8. 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.

9. Edlund A, Lundstrom M, Brannstrom B, et al. Delirium before and after operation for femoral neck fracture. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2001;49:1335-1340.

10. Andersson EM, Gustafson L, Hallberg IR. Acute confusional state in elderly orthopaedic patients: factors of importance for detection in nursing care. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2001;16:7-17.

11. Inouye SK, Viscoli CM, Horwitz RI, et al. A predictive model for delirium in hospitalized elderly medical patients based on admission characteristics. Ann Intern Med. 1993;119:474-481.

12. Marcantonio ER, Juarez G, Goldman L, et al. The relationship of postoperative delirium with psychoactive medications. JAMA. 1994;272:1518-1522.

13. Marcantonio ER, Goldman L, Orav EJ, et al. The association of intraoperative factors with the development of postoperative delirium. Am J Med. 1998;105:380-384.

14. Tune L, Carr S, Hoag E, et al. Anticholinergic effects of drugs commonly prescribed for the elderly: potential means for assessing risk of delirium. Am J Psychiatry. 1992;149:1393-1394.

15. Flaherty JH, Shay K, Weir C, et al. The development of a mental status vital sign for use across the spectrum of care . J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2009;10:379-380.

16. Inouye SK, Van Dyck CH, Alessi CA, et al. Clarifying confusion: the Confusion Assessment Method. A new method for detection of delirium. Ann Intern Med. 1990;113:941-948.

17. Inouye SK. Confusion Assessment Method (CAM): Training Manual and Coding Guide. New Haven, Conn: Yale University School of Medicine; 2003.

18. Halter J, Ouslander J, Tinetti M, et al. Hazzard’s Geriatric Medicine and Gerontology. 6th ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2009;648-658.

19. Eriksson S. Social and environmental contributants to delirium in the elderly. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 1999;10:350-352.

20. Francis J, Martin D, Kapoor WN. A prospective study of delirium in hospitalized elderly. JAMA. 1990;263:1097-1101.

21. Francis J, Hilko EM, Kapoor WN. Acute mental change: when are head scans needed? Clin Res. 1991;39:103.-

22. Rudberg MA, Pompei P, Foreman MD, et al. The natural history of delirium in older hospitalized patients: a syndrome of heterogeneity. Age Ageing. 1997;26:169-174.

23. Soiza RL, Sharma V, Ferguson K, et al. Neuroimaging studies of delirium: a systematic review. J Psychosom Res. 2008;65:239-248.

24. Fong TG, Bogardus ST Jr, Daftary A, et al. Cerebral perfusion changes in older delirious patients using 99mTc HMPAO SPECT. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2006;61:1294-1299.

25. Jacobson SA, Leuchter AF, Walter DO. Conventional and quantitative EEG in the diagnosis of delirium among the elderly. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1993;56:153-158.

26. Marcantonio ER, Flacker JM, Wright RJ, et al. Reducing delirium after hip fracture: a randomized trial. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2001;49:516-522.

27. Inouye SK, Bogardus ST Jr, Charpentier PA, et al. A multicomponent intervention to prevent delirium in hospitalized older patients. N Engl J Med. 1999;340:669-676.

28. Weber JB, Coverdale JH, Kunik ME. Delirium: current trends in prevention and treatment. Intern Med J. 2004;34:115-121.

29. Bo M, Martini B, Ruatta C, et al. Geriatric ward hospitalization reduced incidence delirium among older medical inpatients. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2009;17:760-768.

30. Taguchi T, Yano M, Kido Y. Influence of bright light therapy on postoperative patients: a pilot study. Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2007;23:289-297.

31. McCaffrey R, Locsin R. The effect of music listening on acute confusion and delirium in elders undergoing elective hip and knee surgery. J Clin Nurs. 2004;13:91-96.

32. Remington R. Calming music and hand massage with agitated elderly. Nurs Res. 2004;51:317-323.

33. Seitz DP, Gill SS, van Zyl LT. Antipsychotics in the treatment of delirium: a systematic review. J Clin Psychiatry. 2007;68:11-21.

34. Schwartz T, Masand PS. The role of atypical antipsychotics in the treatment of delirium. Psychosomatics. 2002;43:171-174.

35. Lonergan E, Britton AM, Luxenberg J, et al. Antipsychotics for delirium. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;(2):CD005594.-

36. Hu H, Deng W, Yang H. A prospective random control study comparison of olanzapine and haloperidol in senile delirium. Chongqing Med J. 2004;8:1234-1237.

37. Han CS, Kim YK. A double-blind trial of risperidone and haloperidol for the treatment of delirium. Psychosomatics. 2004;45:297-301.

38. Kim SW, Yoo JA, Lee SY, et al. Risperidone versus olanzapine for the treatment of delirium. Hum Psychopharmacol. 2010;25:298-302.

39. Prakanrattana U, Prapaitrakool S. Efficacy of risperidone for prevention of postoperative delirium in cardiac surgery. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2007;35:714-719.

40. Maneeton B, Maneeton N, Srisurapanont M. An open-label study of quetiapine for delirium. J Med Assoc Thai. 2007;90:2158-2163.

41. Devlin JW, Roberts RJ, Fong JJ, et al. Efficacy and safety of quetiapine in critically ill patients with delirium: a prospective, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study. Crit Care Med. 2010;38:419-427.

42. Gill SS, Bronskill SE, Normand SL, et al. Antipsychotic drug use and mortality in older adults with dementia. Ann Intern Med. 2007;146:775-786.

43. Wang PS, Schneeweiss S, Avorn J, et al. Death in elderly users of conventional vs. atypical antipsychotic medications. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:2335-2341.

44. Liptzin B, Laki A, Garb JL, et al. Donepezil in the prevention and treatment of post-surgical delirium. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2005;13:1100-1106.

45. Sampson EL, Raven PR, Ndhlovu PN, et al. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of donepezil hydrochloride (Aricept) for reducing the incidence of postoperative delirium after elective total hip replacement. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2007;22:343-349.

46. Gamberini M, Bolliger D, Lurati Buse GA, et al. Rivastigmine for the prevention of postoperative delirium in elderly patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery—a randomized controlled trial. Crit Care Med. 2009;37:1762-1768.

47. Overshott R, Vernon M, Morris J, et al. Rivastigmine in the treatment of delirium in older people: a pilot study. Int Psychogeriatr. 2010;22:812-818.

48. Lonergan E, Luxenberg J, Areosa Sastre A. Benzodiazepines for delirium. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;(4):CD006379.-

49. Leung JM, Sands LP, Rico M, et al. Pilot clinical trial of gabapentin to decrease postoperative delirium in older patients. Neurology. 2006;67:1251-1253.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Abdulraouf Ghandour, MD
<text>Geriatric fellow, University of Missouri-Columbia</text>
Ghandour78@gmail.com

Rola Saab, MD
Family and Community Medicine, University of Missouri-Columbia

David R. Mehr, MD, MS
Family and Community Medicine, University of Missouri-Columbia

The authors reported no potential conflict of interest relevant to this article.

Issue
The Journal of Family Practice - 60(12)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
726-734
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Abdulraouf Ghandour, MD
<text>Geriatric fellow, University of Missouri-Columbia</text>
Ghandour78@gmail.com

Rola Saab, MD
Family and Community Medicine, University of Missouri-Columbia

David R. Mehr, MD, MS
Family and Community Medicine, University of Missouri-Columbia

The authors reported no potential conflict of interest relevant to this article.

Author and Disclosure Information

Abdulraouf Ghandour, MD
<text>Geriatric fellow, University of Missouri-Columbia</text>
Ghandour78@gmail.com

Rola Saab, MD
Family and Community Medicine, University of Missouri-Columbia

David R. Mehr, MD, MS
Family and Community Medicine, University of Missouri-Columbia

The authors reported no potential conflict of interest relevant to this article.

Article PDF
Article PDF

PRACTICE RECOMMENDATIONS

Nonpharmacologic interventions are the mainstay of treatment for delirium. B

When medication is needed, atypical antipsychotics are as effective as typical antipsychotics for treating delirium in elderly patients, and have fewer side effects. B

Benzodiazepines should be avoided in elderly patients with delirium that is not associated with alcohol withdrawal. A

Strength of recommendation (SOR)

A Good-quality patient-oriented evidence
B Inconsistent or limited-quality patient-oriented evidence
C Consensus, usual practice, opinion, disease-oriented evidence, case series

CASE Mr. D, a 75-year-old patient with a history of hypertension and congestive heart failure, sustained a femoral neck fracture and was admitted to the hospital for surgery. He underwent open reduction and internal fixation and was doing well postoperatively, until Day 2—when his primary care physician made morning rounds and noted that Mr. D was somnolent. The nurse on duty assured the physician that Mr. D was fine and “was awake and alert earlier,” and attributed his somnolence to the oxycodone (10 mg) the patient was taking for pain. The physician ordered a reduction in dosage.

If Mr. D had been your patient, would you have considered other possible causes of his somnolence? Or do you think the physician’s action was sufficient?

Derived from Latin, the word delirium literally means “off the [ploughed] track.”1 Dozens of terms have been used to describe delirium, with acute confusion state, organic brain syndrome, acute brain syndrome, and toxic psychosis among them.

Delirium has been reported to occur in 15% to 30% of patients on general medical units,2 about 40% of postoperative patients, and up to 70% of terminally ill patients.3 The true prevalence is hard to determine, as up to 66% of cases may be missed.4

Delirium is being diagnosed more frequently, however—a likely result of a growing geriatric population, increased longevity, and greater awareness of the condition. Each year, an estimated 2.3 million US residents are affected, leading to prolonged hospitalization; poor functional outcomes; the development or worsening of dementia; increased nursing home placement; and a significant burden for families and the US health care system.5

Delirium is also associated with an increase in mortality.6,7 The mortality rate among hospitalized patients who develop delirium is reported to be 18%, rising to an estimated 47% within the first 3 months after discharge.6 Greater awareness of risk factors, rapid recognition of signs and symptoms of delirium, and early intervention—detailed in the text and tables that follow—will lead to better outcomes.

Assessing risk, evaluating mental status

In addition to advanced age, risk factors for delirium (TABLE 1)8-14 include alcohol use, brain dysfunction, comorbidities, hypertension, malignancy, anticholinergic medications, anemia, metabolic abnormalities, and male sex. In patients who, like Mr. D, have numerous risk factors, early—and frequent—evaluation of mental status is needed. One way to do this is to treat mental status as a vital sign, to be included in the assessment of every elderly patient.15

The Confusion Assessment Method, a quick and easy-to-use delirium screening tool (TABLE 2), has a sensitivity of 94% to 100% and a specificity of 90% to 95%.16,17 There are a number of other screening tools, including the widely used Mini-Mental State Exam (MMSE), as well as the Delirium Rating Scale, Delirium Symptom Interview, and Delirium Severity Scale.

TABLE 1
Risk factors for delirium
8-14

Advanced age

Alcohol use

Brain dysfunction (dementia, epilepsy)

Hypertension

Male sex

Malignancy

Medications (mainly anticholinergic)

Metabolic abnormalities:

  • - Na <130 or >150 mEq/L
  • - Glucose <60 or >300 mg/dL
  • - BUN/Cr ratio >20

Old age

Preoperative anemia

Preoperative metabolic abnormalities

BUN, blood urea nitrogen; Cr, creatinine; Na, sodium.

TABLE 2
Screening for delirium: The Confusion Assessment Method*
16,17

CriteriaEvidence
Yes to questions 1, 2, and 3 plus 4 or 5 (or both) suggests a delirium diagnosis
1. Acute onsetIs there evidence of an acute change in mental status from the patient’s baseline?
2. Fluctuating courseDid the abnormal behavior fluctuate during the day—ie, tend to come and go or increase and decrease in severity?
3. InattentionDid the patient have difficulty focusing attention, eg, being easily distractible or having difficulty keeping track of what was being said?
PLUS 
4. Disorganized thinkingWas the patient’s thinking disorganized or incoherent, such as rambling or irrelevant conversation, unclear or illogical flow of ideas, or unpredictable switching from subject to subject?
5. Altered level of consciousnessWould you rate the patient’s level of consciousness as (any of the following):
– Vigilant (hyperalert)
– Lethargic (drowsy, easily aroused)
– Stupor (difficult to arouse)
– Coma (unarousable)
*CAM shortened version worksheet.
Adapted from: Inouye SK et al. Clarifying confusion: the Confusion Assessment Method. A new method for detection of delirium. Ann Intern Med. 1990;113:941-948; Inouye SK. Confusion Assessment Method (CAM): Training Manual and Coding Guide. Copyright 2003, Hospital Elder Life Program, LLC.
 

 

Arriving at a delirium diagnosis

The clinical presentation of delirium is characterized by acute—and reversible—impairment of cognition, attention, orientation, and memory, and disruption of the normal sleep/wake cycle. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV-TR) criteria for a delirium diagnosis include all of the following:

  • disturbance of consciousness, with a reduced ability to focus, sustain, or shift attention
  • change in cognition, or a perceptual disturbance, that is not accounted for by a preexisting or developing dementia
  • rapid onset of cognitive impairment, with fluctuation likely during the course of the day
  • evidence from the history, physical exam, or laboratory findings that the disturbed consciousness is a direct physiological consequence of a general medical condition.17

There are 3 basic types of delirium, each associated with a different psychomotor disturbance.

  1. Hyperactive delirium—the least common—is characterized by restlessness and agitation, and is therefore the easiest to diagnose.
  2. Hypoactive delirium is characterized by psychomotor retardation and hypoalertness. It is often misdiagnosed as depression, and has the poorest prognosis.
  3. Mixed delirium—the most common—is characterized by symptoms that fluctuate between hyper- and hypoactivity.18

CASE By lunchtime, Mr. D had awakened; however, he needed help with his meal. After eating, he slept for the rest of the day. At night, a nurse paged the resident to report that the patient’s blood pressure was 82/60 mm Hg and his heart rate was 115. The physician ordered an intravenous fluid bolus, which corrected the patient’s hypotension, but only temporarily.

The fluctuating nature of delirium—most notably, in patients’ level of alertness—is helpful in establishing a diagnosis. The history and physical exam are the gold standard tools, both for diagnosing delirium and identifying the underlying cause (TABLE 3).19,20 A review of the patient’s medications should be a key component of the medical history, as drugs—particularly those with anticholinergic properties—are often associated with delirium. Environmental shifts, including hospitalization and a disruption of the normal sleep/wake cycle, endocrine disorders, infection, and nutritional deficiencies are also potential causes of delirium, among others.

If history and physical exam fail to identify the underlying cause, laboratory testing, including complete blood count, complete metabolic profile, and urinalysis, should be done. Brain imaging is usually not needed for individuals with symptoms of delirium, but computed tomography (CT) may be indicated if a patient’s condition continues to deteriorate while the underlying cause remains unidentified.21 Electroencephalography (EEG) may be used to confirm a delirium diagnosis that’s uncertain, in a patient with underlying dementia, for instance. (In more than 16% of cases of delirium, the cause is unknown.22)

The most common structural abnormalities found in patients with delirium are brain atrophy and increased white matter lesions, as well as basal ganglia lesions.23 Single-photon emission CT (SPECT) shows a reduction of regional cerebral perfusion by 50%,24 while EEG shows slowing of the posterior dominant rhythm and increased generalized slow-wave activity.25

TABLE 3
A DELIRIUM mnemonic to get to the heart of the problem
19,20

CauseComment
DrugsDrug classes: Anesthesia, anticholinergics, anticonvulsants, antiemetics, antihistamines, antihypertensives, antimicrobials, antipsychotics, benzodiazepines, corticosteroids, hypnotics, H2 blockers, muscle relaxants, NSAIDs, opioids, SSRIs, tricyclic antidepressants Drugs: digoxin, levodopa, lithium, theophylline OTCs: henbane, Jimson weed, mandrake, Atropa belladonna extract
EnvironmentalChange of environment, sensory deprivation, sleep deprivation
EndocrineHyperparathyroidism, hyper-/hypothyroidism
Low perfusionMI, pulmonary embolism, CVA
InfectionPneumonia, sepsis, systemic infection, UTI
RetentionFecal impaction, urinary retention
IntoxicationAlcohol, illegal drugs/drug overdose
UndernutritionMalnutrition, thiamin deficiency, vitamin B12 deficiency
MetabolicAcid-base disturbances, fluid and electrolyte abnormalities, hepatic or uremic encephalopathy, hypercarbia, hyper-/hypoglycemia, hyperosmolality, hypoxia
SubduralHistory of falls
CVA, cerebrovascular accident; MI, myocardial infarction; NSAIDs, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs; OTCs, over-the-counter agents; SSRIs, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors; UTI, urinary tract infection.

Treating (or preventing) delirium: Start with these steps

Nonpharmacologic interventions are the mainstay of treatment for patients with delirium, and may also help to prevent the development of delirium in patients at risk. One key measure is to correct, or avoid, disruptions in the patient’s normal sleep/wake cycle—eg, restoring circadian rhythm by avoiding,
to the extent possible, awakening the patient at night for medication or vital signs. Preventing sensory deprivation, by ensuring that the patient’s eyeglasses and hearing aid are nearby and that there is a clock and calendar nearby and adequate light, is also helpful. Other key interventions (TABLE 4)26-28 include:

  • limiting medications associated with delirium (and eliminating any nonessential medication)
  • improving nutrition and ambulation
  • correcting electrolyte and fluid disturbances
  • treating infection
  • involving family members in patient care
  • ensuring that patients receive adequate pain management
  • avoiding transfers (if the patient is hospitalized) and trying to secure a single room.
 

 

Several studies have evaluated the effectiveness of nonpharmacologic interventions in preventing or lowering the incidence of delirium. A large multicomponent delirium prevention study of patients >70 years on general medical units focused on managing risk factors. The interventions studied included (1) avoidance of sensory deprivation, (2) early mobilization, (3) treating dehydration, (4) implementing noise reduction strategies and sleep enhancement programs, and (5) avoiding the use of sleep medications. These interventions proved to be effective not only in lowering the incidence of delirium, but in shortening the duration of delirium in affected patients (NNT=20).27

One study found that proactively using a geriatric consultation model (ie, implementing standardized protocols for the management of 6 risk factors) for elderly hospitalized patients led to a reduction in the incidence of delirium by more than a third.26 Admission to a specialized geriatric unit is associated with a lower incidence of delirium compared with being hospitalized on a general medical unit.29

Reducing the incidence of postoperative delirium. Bright light therapy (a light intensity of 5000 lux with a distance from the light source of 100 cm), implemented postoperatively, may play a role in reducing the incidence of delirium, research suggests.30 Music may be helpful, as well. An RCT involving patients (>65 years) undergoing elective knee or hip surgery found that those who listened to classical music postoperatively had a lower incidence of delirium.31 Similarly, playing music in nursing homes has been shown to decrease aggressive behavior and agitation.32

TABLE 4
Helpful interventions in the hospital or at home
26-28

  • Avoid sensory deprivation (provide hearing aids, eyeglasses, clock, calendar, adequate light)
  • Avoid patient transfers; consider using private rooms
  • Be especially vigilant in monitoring for postoperative complications/infection
  • Eliminate nonessential medications
  • Get patients out of bed as soon as possible
  • Ensure that nurses identify patients at risk and use delirium screening tools
  • Institute measures, as needed, to prevent fecal impaction and urinary retention
  • Institute more frequent checks to ensure adequate oxygen delivery
  • Involve family and caregivers in patient care
  • Prevent or provide early treatment of dehydration
  • Provide adequate nutrition
  • Provide adequate pain management (with scheduled pain management protocol)
  • Reduce noise
  • Seek early geriatric or geropsychiatric consult
  • Take steps to restore normal sleep/wake cycle (eg, avoid nighttime disturbances for medications or vital signs, whenever possible)

When medication is needed, proceed with caution

None of the medications currently used to treat delirium are approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for this indication, and many of them have substantial side effects. Nonetheless, palliative or symptomatic treatment requires some form of sedation for agitated patients with delirium. Thus, it is necessary to strike a balance in order to manage the symptoms of delirium and avoid potential side effects (primarily, sedation). Overly sedating patients can confuse the clinical picture of delirium and make it difficult to differentiate between ongoing delirium and medication side effects. Medication should be started at a low, but frequent, dose to achieve an effective therapeutic level, after which a lower maintenance dose can be used until the cause of delirium is resolved.

Antipsychotics are the cornerstone of drug treatment
Haloperidol has traditionally been used to treat delirium33 and has proven effectiveness. However, it is associated with increased risk of extrapyramidal manifestations compared with atypical antipsychotics.

Atypical antipsychotics (olanzapine, risperidone, quetiapine) are increasingly being used to treat delirium because they have fewer extrapyramidal side effects.34 With the exception of olanzapine (available in intramuscular and oral disintegrating form), atypical antipsychotics are available only in oral form, which may limit their usefulness as a treatment for agitated, delirious patients.

Risperidone (at a dose ranging from 0.25 to 1 mg/d) and olanzapine (1.25 to 2.5 mg/d) have shown similar efficacy to haloperidol (0.75 to 1.5 mg/d) in both the prevention and treatment of delirium, but with fewer extrapyramidal side effects.35-39 Quetiapine, a second-generation antipsychotic, is widely used to treat inpatient delirium, although there are no large RCTs comparing it with placebo. One pilot study and another open-label trial found the drug to be beneficial for patients with delirium, with fewer extrapyramidal side effects than haloperidol.40,41

Do a risk-benefit analysis. The use of antipsychotics in elderly patients with delirium has been associated with increased morbidity and mortality. The incidence of stroke and death were higher for community-dwelling patients (NNH=100) and patients in long-term care (N=67) who received typical or atypical antipsychotics for 6 months compared with that of patients who did not receive any antipsychotics.42,43 Thus, a risk-benefit analysis should be done before prescribing antipsychotics for elderly patients. Both typical and atypical antipsychotics carry black box warnings of increased mortality rates in the elderly.

 

 

Other drugs for delirium? More research is needed
Cholinesterase inhibitors. Procholinergic agents would be expected to be helpful in treating delirium, as cholinergic deficiency has been implicated as a predisposing factor for delirium and medications with anticholinergic effects have been shown to induce delirium. However, several studies of cholinesterase inhibitors have not found this to be the case.44-47

Benzodiazepines. There is no evidence to support the use of benzodiazepines in the treatment of delirium, except when the delirium is related to alcohol withdrawal.48 When indicated, the use of a short-acting benzodiazepine such as lorazepam is preferred for elderly patients (vs long-acting agents like diazepam) because of its shorter half-life and better side effect profile.2 Drowsiness, ataxia, and disinhibition are common side effects of benzodiazepines.

Gabapentin. A pilot study conducted to assess the efficacy of gabapentin (900 mg/d) for the prevention of postoperative delirium found a significantly lower incidence of delirium among patients who received gabapentin compared with placebo. This may be associated with gabapentin’s opioid-sparing effect.49 Larger studies are needed to recommend for or against the use of gabapentin in patients receiving opiates.

Further study of the pathophysiology of delirium is needed, as well, to increase our ability to prevent and treat it.

CASE After receiving the IV fluid bolus, Mr. D became increasingly short of breath and required more oxygen to keep his oxygen saturation in the 90s. Labs were ordered during morning rounds, and the patient was found to have urosepsis. He was admitted to the ICU in septic shock, and was intubated and died several days later.

In retrospect, it was determined that Mr. D had developed hypoactive delirium brought on by the infection—and that his somnolence on the second postoperative day was not a sign of overmedication. Had this been recognized early on through the use of an appropriate screening tool, the outcome would likely have been more favorable.

CORRESPONDENCE Abdulraouf Ghandour, MD, Green Meadows Clinic University Physicians, 3217 Providence Road, Columbia, MO 65203; Ghandour78@gmail.com

PRACTICE RECOMMENDATIONS

Nonpharmacologic interventions are the mainstay of treatment for delirium. B

When medication is needed, atypical antipsychotics are as effective as typical antipsychotics for treating delirium in elderly patients, and have fewer side effects. B

Benzodiazepines should be avoided in elderly patients with delirium that is not associated with alcohol withdrawal. A

Strength of recommendation (SOR)

A Good-quality patient-oriented evidence
B Inconsistent or limited-quality patient-oriented evidence
C Consensus, usual practice, opinion, disease-oriented evidence, case series

CASE Mr. D, a 75-year-old patient with a history of hypertension and congestive heart failure, sustained a femoral neck fracture and was admitted to the hospital for surgery. He underwent open reduction and internal fixation and was doing well postoperatively, until Day 2—when his primary care physician made morning rounds and noted that Mr. D was somnolent. The nurse on duty assured the physician that Mr. D was fine and “was awake and alert earlier,” and attributed his somnolence to the oxycodone (10 mg) the patient was taking for pain. The physician ordered a reduction in dosage.

If Mr. D had been your patient, would you have considered other possible causes of his somnolence? Or do you think the physician’s action was sufficient?

Derived from Latin, the word delirium literally means “off the [ploughed] track.”1 Dozens of terms have been used to describe delirium, with acute confusion state, organic brain syndrome, acute brain syndrome, and toxic psychosis among them.

Delirium has been reported to occur in 15% to 30% of patients on general medical units,2 about 40% of postoperative patients, and up to 70% of terminally ill patients.3 The true prevalence is hard to determine, as up to 66% of cases may be missed.4

Delirium is being diagnosed more frequently, however—a likely result of a growing geriatric population, increased longevity, and greater awareness of the condition. Each year, an estimated 2.3 million US residents are affected, leading to prolonged hospitalization; poor functional outcomes; the development or worsening of dementia; increased nursing home placement; and a significant burden for families and the US health care system.5

Delirium is also associated with an increase in mortality.6,7 The mortality rate among hospitalized patients who develop delirium is reported to be 18%, rising to an estimated 47% within the first 3 months after discharge.6 Greater awareness of risk factors, rapid recognition of signs and symptoms of delirium, and early intervention—detailed in the text and tables that follow—will lead to better outcomes.

Assessing risk, evaluating mental status

In addition to advanced age, risk factors for delirium (TABLE 1)8-14 include alcohol use, brain dysfunction, comorbidities, hypertension, malignancy, anticholinergic medications, anemia, metabolic abnormalities, and male sex. In patients who, like Mr. D, have numerous risk factors, early—and frequent—evaluation of mental status is needed. One way to do this is to treat mental status as a vital sign, to be included in the assessment of every elderly patient.15

The Confusion Assessment Method, a quick and easy-to-use delirium screening tool (TABLE 2), has a sensitivity of 94% to 100% and a specificity of 90% to 95%.16,17 There are a number of other screening tools, including the widely used Mini-Mental State Exam (MMSE), as well as the Delirium Rating Scale, Delirium Symptom Interview, and Delirium Severity Scale.

TABLE 1
Risk factors for delirium
8-14

Advanced age

Alcohol use

Brain dysfunction (dementia, epilepsy)

Hypertension

Male sex

Malignancy

Medications (mainly anticholinergic)

Metabolic abnormalities:

  • - Na <130 or >150 mEq/L
  • - Glucose <60 or >300 mg/dL
  • - BUN/Cr ratio >20

Old age

Preoperative anemia

Preoperative metabolic abnormalities

BUN, blood urea nitrogen; Cr, creatinine; Na, sodium.

TABLE 2
Screening for delirium: The Confusion Assessment Method*
16,17

CriteriaEvidence
Yes to questions 1, 2, and 3 plus 4 or 5 (or both) suggests a delirium diagnosis
1. Acute onsetIs there evidence of an acute change in mental status from the patient’s baseline?
2. Fluctuating courseDid the abnormal behavior fluctuate during the day—ie, tend to come and go or increase and decrease in severity?
3. InattentionDid the patient have difficulty focusing attention, eg, being easily distractible or having difficulty keeping track of what was being said?
PLUS 
4. Disorganized thinkingWas the patient’s thinking disorganized or incoherent, such as rambling or irrelevant conversation, unclear or illogical flow of ideas, or unpredictable switching from subject to subject?
5. Altered level of consciousnessWould you rate the patient’s level of consciousness as (any of the following):
– Vigilant (hyperalert)
– Lethargic (drowsy, easily aroused)
– Stupor (difficult to arouse)
– Coma (unarousable)
*CAM shortened version worksheet.
Adapted from: Inouye SK et al. Clarifying confusion: the Confusion Assessment Method. A new method for detection of delirium. Ann Intern Med. 1990;113:941-948; Inouye SK. Confusion Assessment Method (CAM): Training Manual and Coding Guide. Copyright 2003, Hospital Elder Life Program, LLC.
 

 

Arriving at a delirium diagnosis

The clinical presentation of delirium is characterized by acute—and reversible—impairment of cognition, attention, orientation, and memory, and disruption of the normal sleep/wake cycle. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV-TR) criteria for a delirium diagnosis include all of the following:

  • disturbance of consciousness, with a reduced ability to focus, sustain, or shift attention
  • change in cognition, or a perceptual disturbance, that is not accounted for by a preexisting or developing dementia
  • rapid onset of cognitive impairment, with fluctuation likely during the course of the day
  • evidence from the history, physical exam, or laboratory findings that the disturbed consciousness is a direct physiological consequence of a general medical condition.17

There are 3 basic types of delirium, each associated with a different psychomotor disturbance.

  1. Hyperactive delirium—the least common—is characterized by restlessness and agitation, and is therefore the easiest to diagnose.
  2. Hypoactive delirium is characterized by psychomotor retardation and hypoalertness. It is often misdiagnosed as depression, and has the poorest prognosis.
  3. Mixed delirium—the most common—is characterized by symptoms that fluctuate between hyper- and hypoactivity.18

CASE By lunchtime, Mr. D had awakened; however, he needed help with his meal. After eating, he slept for the rest of the day. At night, a nurse paged the resident to report that the patient’s blood pressure was 82/60 mm Hg and his heart rate was 115. The physician ordered an intravenous fluid bolus, which corrected the patient’s hypotension, but only temporarily.

The fluctuating nature of delirium—most notably, in patients’ level of alertness—is helpful in establishing a diagnosis. The history and physical exam are the gold standard tools, both for diagnosing delirium and identifying the underlying cause (TABLE 3).19,20 A review of the patient’s medications should be a key component of the medical history, as drugs—particularly those with anticholinergic properties—are often associated with delirium. Environmental shifts, including hospitalization and a disruption of the normal sleep/wake cycle, endocrine disorders, infection, and nutritional deficiencies are also potential causes of delirium, among others.

If history and physical exam fail to identify the underlying cause, laboratory testing, including complete blood count, complete metabolic profile, and urinalysis, should be done. Brain imaging is usually not needed for individuals with symptoms of delirium, but computed tomography (CT) may be indicated if a patient’s condition continues to deteriorate while the underlying cause remains unidentified.21 Electroencephalography (EEG) may be used to confirm a delirium diagnosis that’s uncertain, in a patient with underlying dementia, for instance. (In more than 16% of cases of delirium, the cause is unknown.22)

The most common structural abnormalities found in patients with delirium are brain atrophy and increased white matter lesions, as well as basal ganglia lesions.23 Single-photon emission CT (SPECT) shows a reduction of regional cerebral perfusion by 50%,24 while EEG shows slowing of the posterior dominant rhythm and increased generalized slow-wave activity.25

TABLE 3
A DELIRIUM mnemonic to get to the heart of the problem
19,20

CauseComment
DrugsDrug classes: Anesthesia, anticholinergics, anticonvulsants, antiemetics, antihistamines, antihypertensives, antimicrobials, antipsychotics, benzodiazepines, corticosteroids, hypnotics, H2 blockers, muscle relaxants, NSAIDs, opioids, SSRIs, tricyclic antidepressants Drugs: digoxin, levodopa, lithium, theophylline OTCs: henbane, Jimson weed, mandrake, Atropa belladonna extract
EnvironmentalChange of environment, sensory deprivation, sleep deprivation
EndocrineHyperparathyroidism, hyper-/hypothyroidism
Low perfusionMI, pulmonary embolism, CVA
InfectionPneumonia, sepsis, systemic infection, UTI
RetentionFecal impaction, urinary retention
IntoxicationAlcohol, illegal drugs/drug overdose
UndernutritionMalnutrition, thiamin deficiency, vitamin B12 deficiency
MetabolicAcid-base disturbances, fluid and electrolyte abnormalities, hepatic or uremic encephalopathy, hypercarbia, hyper-/hypoglycemia, hyperosmolality, hypoxia
SubduralHistory of falls
CVA, cerebrovascular accident; MI, myocardial infarction; NSAIDs, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs; OTCs, over-the-counter agents; SSRIs, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors; UTI, urinary tract infection.

Treating (or preventing) delirium: Start with these steps

Nonpharmacologic interventions are the mainstay of treatment for patients with delirium, and may also help to prevent the development of delirium in patients at risk. One key measure is to correct, or avoid, disruptions in the patient’s normal sleep/wake cycle—eg, restoring circadian rhythm by avoiding,
to the extent possible, awakening the patient at night for medication or vital signs. Preventing sensory deprivation, by ensuring that the patient’s eyeglasses and hearing aid are nearby and that there is a clock and calendar nearby and adequate light, is also helpful. Other key interventions (TABLE 4)26-28 include:

  • limiting medications associated with delirium (and eliminating any nonessential medication)
  • improving nutrition and ambulation
  • correcting electrolyte and fluid disturbances
  • treating infection
  • involving family members in patient care
  • ensuring that patients receive adequate pain management
  • avoiding transfers (if the patient is hospitalized) and trying to secure a single room.
 

 

Several studies have evaluated the effectiveness of nonpharmacologic interventions in preventing or lowering the incidence of delirium. A large multicomponent delirium prevention study of patients >70 years on general medical units focused on managing risk factors. The interventions studied included (1) avoidance of sensory deprivation, (2) early mobilization, (3) treating dehydration, (4) implementing noise reduction strategies and sleep enhancement programs, and (5) avoiding the use of sleep medications. These interventions proved to be effective not only in lowering the incidence of delirium, but in shortening the duration of delirium in affected patients (NNT=20).27

One study found that proactively using a geriatric consultation model (ie, implementing standardized protocols for the management of 6 risk factors) for elderly hospitalized patients led to a reduction in the incidence of delirium by more than a third.26 Admission to a specialized geriatric unit is associated with a lower incidence of delirium compared with being hospitalized on a general medical unit.29

Reducing the incidence of postoperative delirium. Bright light therapy (a light intensity of 5000 lux with a distance from the light source of 100 cm), implemented postoperatively, may play a role in reducing the incidence of delirium, research suggests.30 Music may be helpful, as well. An RCT involving patients (>65 years) undergoing elective knee or hip surgery found that those who listened to classical music postoperatively had a lower incidence of delirium.31 Similarly, playing music in nursing homes has been shown to decrease aggressive behavior and agitation.32

TABLE 4
Helpful interventions in the hospital or at home
26-28

  • Avoid sensory deprivation (provide hearing aids, eyeglasses, clock, calendar, adequate light)
  • Avoid patient transfers; consider using private rooms
  • Be especially vigilant in monitoring for postoperative complications/infection
  • Eliminate nonessential medications
  • Get patients out of bed as soon as possible
  • Ensure that nurses identify patients at risk and use delirium screening tools
  • Institute measures, as needed, to prevent fecal impaction and urinary retention
  • Institute more frequent checks to ensure adequate oxygen delivery
  • Involve family and caregivers in patient care
  • Prevent or provide early treatment of dehydration
  • Provide adequate nutrition
  • Provide adequate pain management (with scheduled pain management protocol)
  • Reduce noise
  • Seek early geriatric or geropsychiatric consult
  • Take steps to restore normal sleep/wake cycle (eg, avoid nighttime disturbances for medications or vital signs, whenever possible)

When medication is needed, proceed with caution

None of the medications currently used to treat delirium are approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for this indication, and many of them have substantial side effects. Nonetheless, palliative or symptomatic treatment requires some form of sedation for agitated patients with delirium. Thus, it is necessary to strike a balance in order to manage the symptoms of delirium and avoid potential side effects (primarily, sedation). Overly sedating patients can confuse the clinical picture of delirium and make it difficult to differentiate between ongoing delirium and medication side effects. Medication should be started at a low, but frequent, dose to achieve an effective therapeutic level, after which a lower maintenance dose can be used until the cause of delirium is resolved.

Antipsychotics are the cornerstone of drug treatment
Haloperidol has traditionally been used to treat delirium33 and has proven effectiveness. However, it is associated with increased risk of extrapyramidal manifestations compared with atypical antipsychotics.

Atypical antipsychotics (olanzapine, risperidone, quetiapine) are increasingly being used to treat delirium because they have fewer extrapyramidal side effects.34 With the exception of olanzapine (available in intramuscular and oral disintegrating form), atypical antipsychotics are available only in oral form, which may limit their usefulness as a treatment for agitated, delirious patients.

Risperidone (at a dose ranging from 0.25 to 1 mg/d) and olanzapine (1.25 to 2.5 mg/d) have shown similar efficacy to haloperidol (0.75 to 1.5 mg/d) in both the prevention and treatment of delirium, but with fewer extrapyramidal side effects.35-39 Quetiapine, a second-generation antipsychotic, is widely used to treat inpatient delirium, although there are no large RCTs comparing it with placebo. One pilot study and another open-label trial found the drug to be beneficial for patients with delirium, with fewer extrapyramidal side effects than haloperidol.40,41

Do a risk-benefit analysis. The use of antipsychotics in elderly patients with delirium has been associated with increased morbidity and mortality. The incidence of stroke and death were higher for community-dwelling patients (NNH=100) and patients in long-term care (N=67) who received typical or atypical antipsychotics for 6 months compared with that of patients who did not receive any antipsychotics.42,43 Thus, a risk-benefit analysis should be done before prescribing antipsychotics for elderly patients. Both typical and atypical antipsychotics carry black box warnings of increased mortality rates in the elderly.

 

 

Other drugs for delirium? More research is needed
Cholinesterase inhibitors. Procholinergic agents would be expected to be helpful in treating delirium, as cholinergic deficiency has been implicated as a predisposing factor for delirium and medications with anticholinergic effects have been shown to induce delirium. However, several studies of cholinesterase inhibitors have not found this to be the case.44-47

Benzodiazepines. There is no evidence to support the use of benzodiazepines in the treatment of delirium, except when the delirium is related to alcohol withdrawal.48 When indicated, the use of a short-acting benzodiazepine such as lorazepam is preferred for elderly patients (vs long-acting agents like diazepam) because of its shorter half-life and better side effect profile.2 Drowsiness, ataxia, and disinhibition are common side effects of benzodiazepines.

Gabapentin. A pilot study conducted to assess the efficacy of gabapentin (900 mg/d) for the prevention of postoperative delirium found a significantly lower incidence of delirium among patients who received gabapentin compared with placebo. This may be associated with gabapentin’s opioid-sparing effect.49 Larger studies are needed to recommend for or against the use of gabapentin in patients receiving opiates.

Further study of the pathophysiology of delirium is needed, as well, to increase our ability to prevent and treat it.

CASE After receiving the IV fluid bolus, Mr. D became increasingly short of breath and required more oxygen to keep his oxygen saturation in the 90s. Labs were ordered during morning rounds, and the patient was found to have urosepsis. He was admitted to the ICU in septic shock, and was intubated and died several days later.

In retrospect, it was determined that Mr. D had developed hypoactive delirium brought on by the infection—and that his somnolence on the second postoperative day was not a sign of overmedication. Had this been recognized early on through the use of an appropriate screening tool, the outcome would likely have been more favorable.

CORRESPONDENCE Abdulraouf Ghandour, MD, Green Meadows Clinic University Physicians, 3217 Providence Road, Columbia, MO 65203; Ghandour78@gmail.com

References

1. Casselman WG. Dictionary of Medical Derivations. The Real Meaning of Medical Terms. New York, NY: Informa Healthcare; 1998.

2. Kiely DK, Bergmann MA, Murphy KM, et al. Delirium among newly admitted postacute facility patients, prevalence, symptoms, and severity. J Gerontol Biol Sci Med Sci. 2003;58:M441-M445.

3. Inouye SK, Charpentier PA. Precipitating factors for delirium in hospitalized elderly persons. Predictive model and interrelationship with baseline vulnerability. JAMA. 1996;275:852-857.

4. 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.

5. Pompei P, Foreman M, Rudberg M, et al. Delirium in hospitalized older persons: outcomes and predictors. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1994;42:809-815.

6. Kolbeinsson H, Jonsson A. Delirium and dementia in acute medical admissions of elderly patients in Iceland. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1993;87:123-127.

7. Cole MG, Primeau FJ. Prognosis of delirium in elderly hospital patients. CMAJ. 1993;149:41-46.

8. 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.

9. Edlund A, Lundstrom M, Brannstrom B, et al. Delirium before and after operation for femoral neck fracture. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2001;49:1335-1340.

10. Andersson EM, Gustafson L, Hallberg IR. Acute confusional state in elderly orthopaedic patients: factors of importance for detection in nursing care. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2001;16:7-17.

11. Inouye SK, Viscoli CM, Horwitz RI, et al. A predictive model for delirium in hospitalized elderly medical patients based on admission characteristics. Ann Intern Med. 1993;119:474-481.

12. Marcantonio ER, Juarez G, Goldman L, et al. The relationship of postoperative delirium with psychoactive medications. JAMA. 1994;272:1518-1522.

13. Marcantonio ER, Goldman L, Orav EJ, et al. The association of intraoperative factors with the development of postoperative delirium. Am J Med. 1998;105:380-384.

14. Tune L, Carr S, Hoag E, et al. Anticholinergic effects of drugs commonly prescribed for the elderly: potential means for assessing risk of delirium. Am J Psychiatry. 1992;149:1393-1394.

15. Flaherty JH, Shay K, Weir C, et al. The development of a mental status vital sign for use across the spectrum of care . J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2009;10:379-380.

16. Inouye SK, Van Dyck CH, Alessi CA, et al. Clarifying confusion: the Confusion Assessment Method. A new method for detection of delirium. Ann Intern Med. 1990;113:941-948.

17. Inouye SK. Confusion Assessment Method (CAM): Training Manual and Coding Guide. New Haven, Conn: Yale University School of Medicine; 2003.

18. Halter J, Ouslander J, Tinetti M, et al. Hazzard’s Geriatric Medicine and Gerontology. 6th ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2009;648-658.

19. Eriksson S. Social and environmental contributants to delirium in the elderly. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 1999;10:350-352.

20. Francis J, Martin D, Kapoor WN. A prospective study of delirium in hospitalized elderly. JAMA. 1990;263:1097-1101.

21. Francis J, Hilko EM, Kapoor WN. Acute mental change: when are head scans needed? Clin Res. 1991;39:103.-

22. Rudberg MA, Pompei P, Foreman MD, et al. The natural history of delirium in older hospitalized patients: a syndrome of heterogeneity. Age Ageing. 1997;26:169-174.

23. Soiza RL, Sharma V, Ferguson K, et al. Neuroimaging studies of delirium: a systematic review. J Psychosom Res. 2008;65:239-248.

24. Fong TG, Bogardus ST Jr, Daftary A, et al. Cerebral perfusion changes in older delirious patients using 99mTc HMPAO SPECT. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2006;61:1294-1299.

25. Jacobson SA, Leuchter AF, Walter DO. Conventional and quantitative EEG in the diagnosis of delirium among the elderly. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1993;56:153-158.

26. Marcantonio ER, Flacker JM, Wright RJ, et al. Reducing delirium after hip fracture: a randomized trial. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2001;49:516-522.

27. Inouye SK, Bogardus ST Jr, Charpentier PA, et al. A multicomponent intervention to prevent delirium in hospitalized older patients. N Engl J Med. 1999;340:669-676.

28. Weber JB, Coverdale JH, Kunik ME. Delirium: current trends in prevention and treatment. Intern Med J. 2004;34:115-121.

29. Bo M, Martini B, Ruatta C, et al. Geriatric ward hospitalization reduced incidence delirium among older medical inpatients. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2009;17:760-768.

30. Taguchi T, Yano M, Kido Y. Influence of bright light therapy on postoperative patients: a pilot study. Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2007;23:289-297.

31. McCaffrey R, Locsin R. The effect of music listening on acute confusion and delirium in elders undergoing elective hip and knee surgery. J Clin Nurs. 2004;13:91-96.

32. Remington R. Calming music and hand massage with agitated elderly. Nurs Res. 2004;51:317-323.

33. Seitz DP, Gill SS, van Zyl LT. Antipsychotics in the treatment of delirium: a systematic review. J Clin Psychiatry. 2007;68:11-21.

34. Schwartz T, Masand PS. The role of atypical antipsychotics in the treatment of delirium. Psychosomatics. 2002;43:171-174.

35. Lonergan E, Britton AM, Luxenberg J, et al. Antipsychotics for delirium. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;(2):CD005594.-

36. Hu H, Deng W, Yang H. A prospective random control study comparison of olanzapine and haloperidol in senile delirium. Chongqing Med J. 2004;8:1234-1237.

37. Han CS, Kim YK. A double-blind trial of risperidone and haloperidol for the treatment of delirium. Psychosomatics. 2004;45:297-301.

38. Kim SW, Yoo JA, Lee SY, et al. Risperidone versus olanzapine for the treatment of delirium. Hum Psychopharmacol. 2010;25:298-302.

39. Prakanrattana U, Prapaitrakool S. Efficacy of risperidone for prevention of postoperative delirium in cardiac surgery. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2007;35:714-719.

40. Maneeton B, Maneeton N, Srisurapanont M. An open-label study of quetiapine for delirium. J Med Assoc Thai. 2007;90:2158-2163.

41. Devlin JW, Roberts RJ, Fong JJ, et al. Efficacy and safety of quetiapine in critically ill patients with delirium: a prospective, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study. Crit Care Med. 2010;38:419-427.

42. Gill SS, Bronskill SE, Normand SL, et al. Antipsychotic drug use and mortality in older adults with dementia. Ann Intern Med. 2007;146:775-786.

43. Wang PS, Schneeweiss S, Avorn J, et al. Death in elderly users of conventional vs. atypical antipsychotic medications. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:2335-2341.

44. Liptzin B, Laki A, Garb JL, et al. Donepezil in the prevention and treatment of post-surgical delirium. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2005;13:1100-1106.

45. Sampson EL, Raven PR, Ndhlovu PN, et al. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of donepezil hydrochloride (Aricept) for reducing the incidence of postoperative delirium after elective total hip replacement. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2007;22:343-349.

46. Gamberini M, Bolliger D, Lurati Buse GA, et al. Rivastigmine for the prevention of postoperative delirium in elderly patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery—a randomized controlled trial. Crit Care Med. 2009;37:1762-1768.

47. Overshott R, Vernon M, Morris J, et al. Rivastigmine in the treatment of delirium in older people: a pilot study. Int Psychogeriatr. 2010;22:812-818.

48. Lonergan E, Luxenberg J, Areosa Sastre A. Benzodiazepines for delirium. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;(4):CD006379.-

49. Leung JM, Sands LP, Rico M, et al. Pilot clinical trial of gabapentin to decrease postoperative delirium in older patients. Neurology. 2006;67:1251-1253.

References

1. Casselman WG. Dictionary of Medical Derivations. The Real Meaning of Medical Terms. New York, NY: Informa Healthcare; 1998.

2. Kiely DK, Bergmann MA, Murphy KM, et al. Delirium among newly admitted postacute facility patients, prevalence, symptoms, and severity. J Gerontol Biol Sci Med Sci. 2003;58:M441-M445.

3. Inouye SK, Charpentier PA. Precipitating factors for delirium in hospitalized elderly persons. Predictive model and interrelationship with baseline vulnerability. JAMA. 1996;275:852-857.

4. 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.

5. Pompei P, Foreman M, Rudberg M, et al. Delirium in hospitalized older persons: outcomes and predictors. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1994;42:809-815.

6. Kolbeinsson H, Jonsson A. Delirium and dementia in acute medical admissions of elderly patients in Iceland. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1993;87:123-127.

7. Cole MG, Primeau FJ. Prognosis of delirium in elderly hospital patients. CMAJ. 1993;149:41-46.

8. 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.

9. Edlund A, Lundstrom M, Brannstrom B, et al. Delirium before and after operation for femoral neck fracture. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2001;49:1335-1340.

10. Andersson EM, Gustafson L, Hallberg IR. Acute confusional state in elderly orthopaedic patients: factors of importance for detection in nursing care. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2001;16:7-17.

11. Inouye SK, Viscoli CM, Horwitz RI, et al. A predictive model for delirium in hospitalized elderly medical patients based on admission characteristics. Ann Intern Med. 1993;119:474-481.

12. Marcantonio ER, Juarez G, Goldman L, et al. The relationship of postoperative delirium with psychoactive medications. JAMA. 1994;272:1518-1522.

13. Marcantonio ER, Goldman L, Orav EJ, et al. The association of intraoperative factors with the development of postoperative delirium. Am J Med. 1998;105:380-384.

14. Tune L, Carr S, Hoag E, et al. Anticholinergic effects of drugs commonly prescribed for the elderly: potential means for assessing risk of delirium. Am J Psychiatry. 1992;149:1393-1394.

15. Flaherty JH, Shay K, Weir C, et al. The development of a mental status vital sign for use across the spectrum of care . J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2009;10:379-380.

16. Inouye SK, Van Dyck CH, Alessi CA, et al. Clarifying confusion: the Confusion Assessment Method. A new method for detection of delirium. Ann Intern Med. 1990;113:941-948.

17. Inouye SK. Confusion Assessment Method (CAM): Training Manual and Coding Guide. New Haven, Conn: Yale University School of Medicine; 2003.

18. Halter J, Ouslander J, Tinetti M, et al. Hazzard’s Geriatric Medicine and Gerontology. 6th ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2009;648-658.

19. Eriksson S. Social and environmental contributants to delirium in the elderly. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 1999;10:350-352.

20. Francis J, Martin D, Kapoor WN. A prospective study of delirium in hospitalized elderly. JAMA. 1990;263:1097-1101.

21. Francis J, Hilko EM, Kapoor WN. Acute mental change: when are head scans needed? Clin Res. 1991;39:103.-

22. Rudberg MA, Pompei P, Foreman MD, et al. The natural history of delirium in older hospitalized patients: a syndrome of heterogeneity. Age Ageing. 1997;26:169-174.

23. Soiza RL, Sharma V, Ferguson K, et al. Neuroimaging studies of delirium: a systematic review. J Psychosom Res. 2008;65:239-248.

24. Fong TG, Bogardus ST Jr, Daftary A, et al. Cerebral perfusion changes in older delirious patients using 99mTc HMPAO SPECT. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2006;61:1294-1299.

25. Jacobson SA, Leuchter AF, Walter DO. Conventional and quantitative EEG in the diagnosis of delirium among the elderly. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1993;56:153-158.

26. Marcantonio ER, Flacker JM, Wright RJ, et al. Reducing delirium after hip fracture: a randomized trial. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2001;49:516-522.

27. Inouye SK, Bogardus ST Jr, Charpentier PA, et al. A multicomponent intervention to prevent delirium in hospitalized older patients. N Engl J Med. 1999;340:669-676.

28. Weber JB, Coverdale JH, Kunik ME. Delirium: current trends in prevention and treatment. Intern Med J. 2004;34:115-121.

29. Bo M, Martini B, Ruatta C, et al. Geriatric ward hospitalization reduced incidence delirium among older medical inpatients. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2009;17:760-768.

30. Taguchi T, Yano M, Kido Y. Influence of bright light therapy on postoperative patients: a pilot study. Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2007;23:289-297.

31. McCaffrey R, Locsin R. The effect of music listening on acute confusion and delirium in elders undergoing elective hip and knee surgery. J Clin Nurs. 2004;13:91-96.

32. Remington R. Calming music and hand massage with agitated elderly. Nurs Res. 2004;51:317-323.

33. Seitz DP, Gill SS, van Zyl LT. Antipsychotics in the treatment of delirium: a systematic review. J Clin Psychiatry. 2007;68:11-21.

34. Schwartz T, Masand PS. The role of atypical antipsychotics in the treatment of delirium. Psychosomatics. 2002;43:171-174.

35. Lonergan E, Britton AM, Luxenberg J, et al. Antipsychotics for delirium. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;(2):CD005594.-

36. Hu H, Deng W, Yang H. A prospective random control study comparison of olanzapine and haloperidol in senile delirium. Chongqing Med J. 2004;8:1234-1237.

37. Han CS, Kim YK. A double-blind trial of risperidone and haloperidol for the treatment of delirium. Psychosomatics. 2004;45:297-301.

38. Kim SW, Yoo JA, Lee SY, et al. Risperidone versus olanzapine for the treatment of delirium. Hum Psychopharmacol. 2010;25:298-302.

39. Prakanrattana U, Prapaitrakool S. Efficacy of risperidone for prevention of postoperative delirium in cardiac surgery. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2007;35:714-719.

40. Maneeton B, Maneeton N, Srisurapanont M. An open-label study of quetiapine for delirium. J Med Assoc Thai. 2007;90:2158-2163.

41. Devlin JW, Roberts RJ, Fong JJ, et al. Efficacy and safety of quetiapine in critically ill patients with delirium: a prospective, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study. Crit Care Med. 2010;38:419-427.

42. Gill SS, Bronskill SE, Normand SL, et al. Antipsychotic drug use and mortality in older adults with dementia. Ann Intern Med. 2007;146:775-786.

43. Wang PS, Schneeweiss S, Avorn J, et al. Death in elderly users of conventional vs. atypical antipsychotic medications. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:2335-2341.

44. Liptzin B, Laki A, Garb JL, et al. Donepezil in the prevention and treatment of post-surgical delirium. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2005;13:1100-1106.

45. Sampson EL, Raven PR, Ndhlovu PN, et al. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of donepezil hydrochloride (Aricept) for reducing the incidence of postoperative delirium after elective total hip replacement. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2007;22:343-349.

46. Gamberini M, Bolliger D, Lurati Buse GA, et al. Rivastigmine for the prevention of postoperative delirium in elderly patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery—a randomized controlled trial. Crit Care Med. 2009;37:1762-1768.

47. Overshott R, Vernon M, Morris J, et al. Rivastigmine in the treatment of delirium in older people: a pilot study. Int Psychogeriatr. 2010;22:812-818.

48. Lonergan E, Luxenberg J, Areosa Sastre A. Benzodiazepines for delirium. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;(4):CD006379.-

49. Leung JM, Sands LP, Rico M, et al. Pilot clinical trial of gabapentin to decrease postoperative delirium in older patients. Neurology. 2006;67:1251-1253.

Issue
The Journal of Family Practice - 60(12)
Issue
The Journal of Family Practice - 60(12)
Page Number
726-734
Page Number
726-734
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Detecting and treating delirium—key interventions you may be missing
Display Headline
Detecting and treating delirium—key interventions you may be missing
Sections
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Article PDF Media

Should patients with acute DVT limit activity?

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 01/14/2019 - 11:37
Display Headline
Should patients with acute DVT limit activity?
EVIDENCE-BASED ANSWER

PROBABLY NOT. Ambulation, combined with compression of the affected extremity, appears to be safe for medically stable patients with deep venous thromboses (DVT) (strength of recommendation [SOR]: A, consistent randomized controlled trials [RCTs]). Leg compression and ambulation, compared with bed rest without compression, can effectively decrease swelling and pain (SOR: A, consistent RCTs).

Only weak data exist to suggest that early ambulation can reduce mortality (SOR: C, cohort studies with historical controls).

Evidence summary

Patients with acute DVT have traditionally been treated with immobilization and bed rest, combined with anticoagulation, for days. This approach is motivated by fear of dislodging an unstable thrombus and causing a pulmonary embolism (PE) and by the belief that inactivity relieves local pain and swelling. On the other hand, bed rest promotes stasis, an element in Virchow’s triad.

Early ambulation doesn’t raise risk of PE
We performed a structured literature review, which found 6 RCTs and 3 cohort studies that address this problem. All 6 RCTs included patients with acute DVT but without life-threatening conditions.1-6 They assessed various outcomes, including incidence of new PE, change in leg circumference, leg pain, patient well-being, and progression of DVT.

The studies consistently found that early ambulation, along with compression, is safe when compared with bed rest ( TABLE ). Although the sample size of all the RCTs was small, the RCTs showed consistent trends in favor of ambulation and compression.

A prospective cohort study of new PE in patients treated with ambulation and compression plus anticoagulation found that the incidence of PE was significantly lower than historical incidence rates in patients managed with bed rest.7

Another study using the RIETE registry, a Spanish registry of consecutively enrolled patients with objectively confirmed acute DVT or PE, found no significant difference in occurrence of new PE between immobilized and mobilized patients.8 Patients with DVT who were immobilized were generally sicker, more likely to have PaO2 <60, and more likely to have received lower doses of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) compared with the group that walked (P<.005).

TABLE
Early ambulation and compression: What RCTs show

SubjectsStudy groupsResults
129 patients with DVT, treated with LMWH1 Strict immobilization for 4 days Ambulation for ≥4 h/d, along with compression for 4 days or until swelling subsidedAt 4 days: No difference in PE, leg pain, leg size, mortality At 3 months: No difference in PE, mortality
146 patients with DVT, all anticoagulated5 Hospital treatment with 5 days of bed rest Home care with early walking and compression stockingsNo difference in occurrence of new PE after 10 days
126 patients with DVT, treated with LMWH, compression6 Strict bed rest for 8 days with leg elevation Began full ambulation on day 2No difference in PE
102 patients with DVT, treated with LMWH, compression4 Bed rest for 5 days AmbulationNo differences in PE, thrombus progression, serious adverse events, or leg pain Study didn’t recruit expected number of patients Study showed a trend toward benefit from ambulation
53 patients with DVT2,7 Ambulation and use of firm, inelastic Unna boot bandages Ambulation and elastic compression stockings Strict bed rest for 9 days and no compressionNo difference in quality of life or PE
DVT-related symptoms, leg pain, and circumference improved in compression/ambulation groups No changes noted at 2 years
72 patients with DVT, treated with anticoagulation and compression3 Daily walking exercise and weekly group exercise Control groupNo difference in DVT, PE, phlebography results, or calf circumference
DVT, deep vein thrombosis; LMWH, low-molecular-weight heparin; PE, pulmonary embolism.
 

 

Does ambulation affect thrombus propagation?
A multicenter RCT showed that thrombus progression occurred more often in patients who were treated with bed rest compared with patients treated with ambulation and compression (P<.01).2

Another RCT revealed a similar trend, though the difference didn’t reach statistical significance because of small sample size.4 The clinical importance of these phlebographic studies isn’t clear.

Is it the walking, or compression, that works?
RCTs have shown that ambulation with leg compression, compared with bed rest without compression, can effectively decrease leg swelling and pain1,2,4 The difference was detectable 2 years after DVT.7

In contrast, RCTs in which both ambulating and resting patients received compression therapy showed no significant difference in leg circumference at 1 or 6 months.3 This finding suggests that the benefit on local symptoms may result from compression rather than ambulation.

Reduced mortality? Evidence is weak
Estimates of the possible effect on mortality of ambulation compared with bed rest are based on cohort studies. A cohort study in which 691 patients were kept walking with compression therapy reported a mortality rate of 0.2%.9 In another cohort, the mortality rate was also 0.2%, and all deaths occurred in patients older than 70 years.10

This rate is lower than rates reported in the historic literature, which typically are 1% among patients treated with unfractionated heparin and bed rest.9,10 A retrospective, multicenter cohort of 1647 patients treated with unfractionated heparin and bed rest in different German hospitals reported a rate of fatal PE of 2.33%.11

Data from the RIETE registry indicated that overall mortality was significantly higher in immobilized patients with a PE (3.6% vs 0.5% in mobile patients; P=.01).8 Notably, immobilized patients with a PE were more likely to be hypoxic and also tended to receive lower doses of LMWH. No differences were found in outcomes for patients with DVT.

Recommendations

The American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) doesn’t recommend bed rest in its guidelines for treating acute venous thromboembolism, but rather ambulation as tolerated after starting anticoagulation. Patients who are not hemodynamically stable should be stabilized first.

The ACCP also recommends wearing an elastic compression stocking with a pressure of 30 to 40 mm Hg at the ankle for 2 years after an episode of DVT and a course of intermittent pneumatic compression for patients with severe edema of the leg resulting from post-thrombotic syndrome.12

A joint guideline from the American College of Physicians and the American Academy of Family Physicians doesn’t make recommendations about ambulation for therapy of DVT and PE.13

References

1. Aschwanden M, Labs KH, Engel H, et al. Acute deep vein thrombosis: early mobilization does not increase the frequency of pulmonary embolism. Thromb Haemost. 2001;85:42-46.

2. Blattler W, Partsch H. Leg compression and ambulation is better than bed rest for the treatment of acute deep venous thrombosis. Int Angiol. 2003;22:393-400.

3. Isma N, Johanssson E, Bjork A, et al. Does supervised exercise after deep venous thrombosis improve recanalization of occluded vein segments? A randomized study. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2007;23:25-30.

4. Junger M, Diehm C, Storiko H, et al. Mobilization versus immobilization in the treatment of acute proximal deep venous thrombosis: a prospective, randomized, open, multicentre trial. Curr Med Res Opin. 2006;22:593-602.

5. Romera A, Vila R, Perez-Piqueras A, et al. Early mobilization in patients with acute deep vein thrombosis: does it increase the incidence of symptomatic pulmonary embolism? Phlebology. 2005;20:141.-

6. Schellong SM, Schwarz T, Kropp J, et al. Bed rest in deep vein thrombosis and the incidence of scintigraphic pulmonary embolism. Thromb Haemost. 1999;82(suppl 1):127-129.

7. Partsch H, Kaulich M, Mayer W. Immediate mobilisation in acute vein thrombosis reduces post-thrombotic syndrome. Int Angiol. 2004;23:206-212.

8. Trujillo-Santos J, Perea-Milla E, Jimenez-Puente A, et al. Bed rest or ambulation in the initial treatment of patients with acute deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism: findings from the RIETE registry. Chest. 2005;127:1631-1636.

9. Partsch H, Kechavarz B, Kohn H, et al. The effect of mobilisation of patients during treatment of thromboembolic disorders with low-molecular-weight heparin. Int Angiol. 1997;16:189-192.

10. Partsch H. Therapy of deep vein thrombosis with low molecular weight heparin, leg compression and immediate ambulation. Vasa. 2001;30:195-204.

11. Martin M. PHLECO: a multicenter study of the fate of 1647 hospital patients treated conservatively without fibrinolysis and surgery. Clin Invest. 1993;71:471-477.

12. Buller HR, Agnelli G, Hull RD, et al. Antithrombotic therapy for venous thromboembolic disease: the Seventh ACCP Conference on Antithrombotic and Thrombolytic Therapy. Chest. 2004;126 (suppl 3):401S-428S.

13. Snow V, Qaseem A, Barry P, et al. Management of venous thromboembolism: a clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians and the American Academy of Family Physicians. Ann Intern Med. 2007;146:204-210.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Rola Saab, MD
James J. Stevermer, MD, MSPH
Susan Meadows, MLS
Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Missouri, Columbia

Issue
The Journal of Family Practice - 59(1)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
50-52
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Rola Saab, MD
James J. Stevermer, MD, MSPH
Susan Meadows, MLS
Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Missouri, Columbia

Author and Disclosure Information

Rola Saab, MD
James J. Stevermer, MD, MSPH
Susan Meadows, MLS
Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Missouri, Columbia

Article PDF
Article PDF
EVIDENCE-BASED ANSWER

PROBABLY NOT. Ambulation, combined with compression of the affected extremity, appears to be safe for medically stable patients with deep venous thromboses (DVT) (strength of recommendation [SOR]: A, consistent randomized controlled trials [RCTs]). Leg compression and ambulation, compared with bed rest without compression, can effectively decrease swelling and pain (SOR: A, consistent RCTs).

Only weak data exist to suggest that early ambulation can reduce mortality (SOR: C, cohort studies with historical controls).

Evidence summary

Patients with acute DVT have traditionally been treated with immobilization and bed rest, combined with anticoagulation, for days. This approach is motivated by fear of dislodging an unstable thrombus and causing a pulmonary embolism (PE) and by the belief that inactivity relieves local pain and swelling. On the other hand, bed rest promotes stasis, an element in Virchow’s triad.

Early ambulation doesn’t raise risk of PE
We performed a structured literature review, which found 6 RCTs and 3 cohort studies that address this problem. All 6 RCTs included patients with acute DVT but without life-threatening conditions.1-6 They assessed various outcomes, including incidence of new PE, change in leg circumference, leg pain, patient well-being, and progression of DVT.

The studies consistently found that early ambulation, along with compression, is safe when compared with bed rest ( TABLE ). Although the sample size of all the RCTs was small, the RCTs showed consistent trends in favor of ambulation and compression.

A prospective cohort study of new PE in patients treated with ambulation and compression plus anticoagulation found that the incidence of PE was significantly lower than historical incidence rates in patients managed with bed rest.7

Another study using the RIETE registry, a Spanish registry of consecutively enrolled patients with objectively confirmed acute DVT or PE, found no significant difference in occurrence of new PE between immobilized and mobilized patients.8 Patients with DVT who were immobilized were generally sicker, more likely to have PaO2 <60, and more likely to have received lower doses of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) compared with the group that walked (P<.005).

TABLE
Early ambulation and compression: What RCTs show

SubjectsStudy groupsResults
129 patients with DVT, treated with LMWH1 Strict immobilization for 4 days Ambulation for ≥4 h/d, along with compression for 4 days or until swelling subsidedAt 4 days: No difference in PE, leg pain, leg size, mortality At 3 months: No difference in PE, mortality
146 patients with DVT, all anticoagulated5 Hospital treatment with 5 days of bed rest Home care with early walking and compression stockingsNo difference in occurrence of new PE after 10 days
126 patients with DVT, treated with LMWH, compression6 Strict bed rest for 8 days with leg elevation Began full ambulation on day 2No difference in PE
102 patients with DVT, treated with LMWH, compression4 Bed rest for 5 days AmbulationNo differences in PE, thrombus progression, serious adverse events, or leg pain Study didn’t recruit expected number of patients Study showed a trend toward benefit from ambulation
53 patients with DVT2,7 Ambulation and use of firm, inelastic Unna boot bandages Ambulation and elastic compression stockings Strict bed rest for 9 days and no compressionNo difference in quality of life or PE
DVT-related symptoms, leg pain, and circumference improved in compression/ambulation groups No changes noted at 2 years
72 patients with DVT, treated with anticoagulation and compression3 Daily walking exercise and weekly group exercise Control groupNo difference in DVT, PE, phlebography results, or calf circumference
DVT, deep vein thrombosis; LMWH, low-molecular-weight heparin; PE, pulmonary embolism.
 

 

Does ambulation affect thrombus propagation?
A multicenter RCT showed that thrombus progression occurred more often in patients who were treated with bed rest compared with patients treated with ambulation and compression (P<.01).2

Another RCT revealed a similar trend, though the difference didn’t reach statistical significance because of small sample size.4 The clinical importance of these phlebographic studies isn’t clear.

Is it the walking, or compression, that works?
RCTs have shown that ambulation with leg compression, compared with bed rest without compression, can effectively decrease leg swelling and pain1,2,4 The difference was detectable 2 years after DVT.7

In contrast, RCTs in which both ambulating and resting patients received compression therapy showed no significant difference in leg circumference at 1 or 6 months.3 This finding suggests that the benefit on local symptoms may result from compression rather than ambulation.

Reduced mortality? Evidence is weak
Estimates of the possible effect on mortality of ambulation compared with bed rest are based on cohort studies. A cohort study in which 691 patients were kept walking with compression therapy reported a mortality rate of 0.2%.9 In another cohort, the mortality rate was also 0.2%, and all deaths occurred in patients older than 70 years.10

This rate is lower than rates reported in the historic literature, which typically are 1% among patients treated with unfractionated heparin and bed rest.9,10 A retrospective, multicenter cohort of 1647 patients treated with unfractionated heparin and bed rest in different German hospitals reported a rate of fatal PE of 2.33%.11

Data from the RIETE registry indicated that overall mortality was significantly higher in immobilized patients with a PE (3.6% vs 0.5% in mobile patients; P=.01).8 Notably, immobilized patients with a PE were more likely to be hypoxic and also tended to receive lower doses of LMWH. No differences were found in outcomes for patients with DVT.

Recommendations

The American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) doesn’t recommend bed rest in its guidelines for treating acute venous thromboembolism, but rather ambulation as tolerated after starting anticoagulation. Patients who are not hemodynamically stable should be stabilized first.

The ACCP also recommends wearing an elastic compression stocking with a pressure of 30 to 40 mm Hg at the ankle for 2 years after an episode of DVT and a course of intermittent pneumatic compression for patients with severe edema of the leg resulting from post-thrombotic syndrome.12

A joint guideline from the American College of Physicians and the American Academy of Family Physicians doesn’t make recommendations about ambulation for therapy of DVT and PE.13

EVIDENCE-BASED ANSWER

PROBABLY NOT. Ambulation, combined with compression of the affected extremity, appears to be safe for medically stable patients with deep venous thromboses (DVT) (strength of recommendation [SOR]: A, consistent randomized controlled trials [RCTs]). Leg compression and ambulation, compared with bed rest without compression, can effectively decrease swelling and pain (SOR: A, consistent RCTs).

Only weak data exist to suggest that early ambulation can reduce mortality (SOR: C, cohort studies with historical controls).

Evidence summary

Patients with acute DVT have traditionally been treated with immobilization and bed rest, combined with anticoagulation, for days. This approach is motivated by fear of dislodging an unstable thrombus and causing a pulmonary embolism (PE) and by the belief that inactivity relieves local pain and swelling. On the other hand, bed rest promotes stasis, an element in Virchow’s triad.

Early ambulation doesn’t raise risk of PE
We performed a structured literature review, which found 6 RCTs and 3 cohort studies that address this problem. All 6 RCTs included patients with acute DVT but without life-threatening conditions.1-6 They assessed various outcomes, including incidence of new PE, change in leg circumference, leg pain, patient well-being, and progression of DVT.

The studies consistently found that early ambulation, along with compression, is safe when compared with bed rest ( TABLE ). Although the sample size of all the RCTs was small, the RCTs showed consistent trends in favor of ambulation and compression.

A prospective cohort study of new PE in patients treated with ambulation and compression plus anticoagulation found that the incidence of PE was significantly lower than historical incidence rates in patients managed with bed rest.7

Another study using the RIETE registry, a Spanish registry of consecutively enrolled patients with objectively confirmed acute DVT or PE, found no significant difference in occurrence of new PE between immobilized and mobilized patients.8 Patients with DVT who were immobilized were generally sicker, more likely to have PaO2 <60, and more likely to have received lower doses of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) compared with the group that walked (P<.005).

TABLE
Early ambulation and compression: What RCTs show

SubjectsStudy groupsResults
129 patients with DVT, treated with LMWH1 Strict immobilization for 4 days Ambulation for ≥4 h/d, along with compression for 4 days or until swelling subsidedAt 4 days: No difference in PE, leg pain, leg size, mortality At 3 months: No difference in PE, mortality
146 patients with DVT, all anticoagulated5 Hospital treatment with 5 days of bed rest Home care with early walking and compression stockingsNo difference in occurrence of new PE after 10 days
126 patients with DVT, treated with LMWH, compression6 Strict bed rest for 8 days with leg elevation Began full ambulation on day 2No difference in PE
102 patients with DVT, treated with LMWH, compression4 Bed rest for 5 days AmbulationNo differences in PE, thrombus progression, serious adverse events, or leg pain Study didn’t recruit expected number of patients Study showed a trend toward benefit from ambulation
53 patients with DVT2,7 Ambulation and use of firm, inelastic Unna boot bandages Ambulation and elastic compression stockings Strict bed rest for 9 days and no compressionNo difference in quality of life or PE
DVT-related symptoms, leg pain, and circumference improved in compression/ambulation groups No changes noted at 2 years
72 patients with DVT, treated with anticoagulation and compression3 Daily walking exercise and weekly group exercise Control groupNo difference in DVT, PE, phlebography results, or calf circumference
DVT, deep vein thrombosis; LMWH, low-molecular-weight heparin; PE, pulmonary embolism.
 

 

Does ambulation affect thrombus propagation?
A multicenter RCT showed that thrombus progression occurred more often in patients who were treated with bed rest compared with patients treated with ambulation and compression (P<.01).2

Another RCT revealed a similar trend, though the difference didn’t reach statistical significance because of small sample size.4 The clinical importance of these phlebographic studies isn’t clear.

Is it the walking, or compression, that works?
RCTs have shown that ambulation with leg compression, compared with bed rest without compression, can effectively decrease leg swelling and pain1,2,4 The difference was detectable 2 years after DVT.7

In contrast, RCTs in which both ambulating and resting patients received compression therapy showed no significant difference in leg circumference at 1 or 6 months.3 This finding suggests that the benefit on local symptoms may result from compression rather than ambulation.

Reduced mortality? Evidence is weak
Estimates of the possible effect on mortality of ambulation compared with bed rest are based on cohort studies. A cohort study in which 691 patients were kept walking with compression therapy reported a mortality rate of 0.2%.9 In another cohort, the mortality rate was also 0.2%, and all deaths occurred in patients older than 70 years.10

This rate is lower than rates reported in the historic literature, which typically are 1% among patients treated with unfractionated heparin and bed rest.9,10 A retrospective, multicenter cohort of 1647 patients treated with unfractionated heparin and bed rest in different German hospitals reported a rate of fatal PE of 2.33%.11

Data from the RIETE registry indicated that overall mortality was significantly higher in immobilized patients with a PE (3.6% vs 0.5% in mobile patients; P=.01).8 Notably, immobilized patients with a PE were more likely to be hypoxic and also tended to receive lower doses of LMWH. No differences were found in outcomes for patients with DVT.

Recommendations

The American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) doesn’t recommend bed rest in its guidelines for treating acute venous thromboembolism, but rather ambulation as tolerated after starting anticoagulation. Patients who are not hemodynamically stable should be stabilized first.

The ACCP also recommends wearing an elastic compression stocking with a pressure of 30 to 40 mm Hg at the ankle for 2 years after an episode of DVT and a course of intermittent pneumatic compression for patients with severe edema of the leg resulting from post-thrombotic syndrome.12

A joint guideline from the American College of Physicians and the American Academy of Family Physicians doesn’t make recommendations about ambulation for therapy of DVT and PE.13

References

1. Aschwanden M, Labs KH, Engel H, et al. Acute deep vein thrombosis: early mobilization does not increase the frequency of pulmonary embolism. Thromb Haemost. 2001;85:42-46.

2. Blattler W, Partsch H. Leg compression and ambulation is better than bed rest for the treatment of acute deep venous thrombosis. Int Angiol. 2003;22:393-400.

3. Isma N, Johanssson E, Bjork A, et al. Does supervised exercise after deep venous thrombosis improve recanalization of occluded vein segments? A randomized study. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2007;23:25-30.

4. Junger M, Diehm C, Storiko H, et al. Mobilization versus immobilization in the treatment of acute proximal deep venous thrombosis: a prospective, randomized, open, multicentre trial. Curr Med Res Opin. 2006;22:593-602.

5. Romera A, Vila R, Perez-Piqueras A, et al. Early mobilization in patients with acute deep vein thrombosis: does it increase the incidence of symptomatic pulmonary embolism? Phlebology. 2005;20:141.-

6. Schellong SM, Schwarz T, Kropp J, et al. Bed rest in deep vein thrombosis and the incidence of scintigraphic pulmonary embolism. Thromb Haemost. 1999;82(suppl 1):127-129.

7. Partsch H, Kaulich M, Mayer W. Immediate mobilisation in acute vein thrombosis reduces post-thrombotic syndrome. Int Angiol. 2004;23:206-212.

8. Trujillo-Santos J, Perea-Milla E, Jimenez-Puente A, et al. Bed rest or ambulation in the initial treatment of patients with acute deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism: findings from the RIETE registry. Chest. 2005;127:1631-1636.

9. Partsch H, Kechavarz B, Kohn H, et al. The effect of mobilisation of patients during treatment of thromboembolic disorders with low-molecular-weight heparin. Int Angiol. 1997;16:189-192.

10. Partsch H. Therapy of deep vein thrombosis with low molecular weight heparin, leg compression and immediate ambulation. Vasa. 2001;30:195-204.

11. Martin M. PHLECO: a multicenter study of the fate of 1647 hospital patients treated conservatively without fibrinolysis and surgery. Clin Invest. 1993;71:471-477.

12. Buller HR, Agnelli G, Hull RD, et al. Antithrombotic therapy for venous thromboembolic disease: the Seventh ACCP Conference on Antithrombotic and Thrombolytic Therapy. Chest. 2004;126 (suppl 3):401S-428S.

13. Snow V, Qaseem A, Barry P, et al. Management of venous thromboembolism: a clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians and the American Academy of Family Physicians. Ann Intern Med. 2007;146:204-210.

References

1. Aschwanden M, Labs KH, Engel H, et al. Acute deep vein thrombosis: early mobilization does not increase the frequency of pulmonary embolism. Thromb Haemost. 2001;85:42-46.

2. Blattler W, Partsch H. Leg compression and ambulation is better than bed rest for the treatment of acute deep venous thrombosis. Int Angiol. 2003;22:393-400.

3. Isma N, Johanssson E, Bjork A, et al. Does supervised exercise after deep venous thrombosis improve recanalization of occluded vein segments? A randomized study. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2007;23:25-30.

4. Junger M, Diehm C, Storiko H, et al. Mobilization versus immobilization in the treatment of acute proximal deep venous thrombosis: a prospective, randomized, open, multicentre trial. Curr Med Res Opin. 2006;22:593-602.

5. Romera A, Vila R, Perez-Piqueras A, et al. Early mobilization in patients with acute deep vein thrombosis: does it increase the incidence of symptomatic pulmonary embolism? Phlebology. 2005;20:141.-

6. Schellong SM, Schwarz T, Kropp J, et al. Bed rest in deep vein thrombosis and the incidence of scintigraphic pulmonary embolism. Thromb Haemost. 1999;82(suppl 1):127-129.

7. Partsch H, Kaulich M, Mayer W. Immediate mobilisation in acute vein thrombosis reduces post-thrombotic syndrome. Int Angiol. 2004;23:206-212.

8. Trujillo-Santos J, Perea-Milla E, Jimenez-Puente A, et al. Bed rest or ambulation in the initial treatment of patients with acute deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism: findings from the RIETE registry. Chest. 2005;127:1631-1636.

9. Partsch H, Kechavarz B, Kohn H, et al. The effect of mobilisation of patients during treatment of thromboembolic disorders with low-molecular-weight heparin. Int Angiol. 1997;16:189-192.

10. Partsch H. Therapy of deep vein thrombosis with low molecular weight heparin, leg compression and immediate ambulation. Vasa. 2001;30:195-204.

11. Martin M. PHLECO: a multicenter study of the fate of 1647 hospital patients treated conservatively without fibrinolysis and surgery. Clin Invest. 1993;71:471-477.

12. Buller HR, Agnelli G, Hull RD, et al. Antithrombotic therapy for venous thromboembolic disease: the Seventh ACCP Conference on Antithrombotic and Thrombolytic Therapy. Chest. 2004;126 (suppl 3):401S-428S.

13. Snow V, Qaseem A, Barry P, et al. Management of venous thromboembolism: a clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians and the American Academy of Family Physicians. Ann Intern Med. 2007;146:204-210.

Issue
The Journal of Family Practice - 59(1)
Issue
The Journal of Family Practice - 59(1)
Page Number
50-52
Page Number
50-52
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Should patients with acute DVT limit activity?
Display Headline
Should patients with acute DVT limit activity?
Sections
PURLs Copyright

Evidence-based answers from the Family Physicians Inquiries Network

Disallow All Ads
Article PDF Media