Biomarkers of delirium risk in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Lozano-Vicario L
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10213257 | biostudies-literature | 2023
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Biomarkers of delirium risk in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Lozano-Vicario Lucía L García-Hermoso Antonio A Cedeno-Veloz Bernardo Abel BA Fernández-Irigoyen Joaquín J Santamaría Enrique E Romero-Ortuno Román R Zambom-Ferraresi Fabricio F Sáez de Asteasu Mikel L ML Muñoz-Vázquez Ángel Javier ÁJ Izquierdo Mikel M Martínez-Velilla Nicolás N
Frontiers in aging neuroscience 20230512
Delirium is a neuropsychiatric syndrome associated with increased morbidity and mortality in older patients. The aim of this study was to review predictive biomarkers of delirium in older patients to gain insights into the pathophysiology of this syndrome and provide guidance for future studies. Two authors independently and systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and Scopus databases up to August 2021. A total of 32 studies were included. Only 6 studies were el ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundPostoperative delirium is a common preventable complication experienced by older adults undergoing elective surgery. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we identified prognostic factors associated with the risk of postoperative delirium among older adults undergoing elective surgery.MethodsMedline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and AgeLine were searched for articles published between inception and April 21, 2016. A total of 5692 titles and abstracts were screened in duplicate for possible inclusion. Studies using any method for diagnosing delirium were eligible. Two reviewers independently completed all data extraction and quality assessments using the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias Tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for cohort studies. Random effects meta-analysis models were used to derive pooled effect estimates.ResultsForty-one studies (9384 patients) reported delirium-related prognostic factors. Among our included studies, the pooled incidence of postoperative delirium was 18.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] 14.3-23.3%, number needed to follow [NNF] = 6). Geriatric syndromes were important predictors of delirium, namely history of delirium (odds ratio [OR] 6.4, 95% CI 2.2-17.9), frailty (OR 4.1, 95% CI 1.4-11.7), cognitive impairment (OR 2.7, 95% CI 1.9-3.8), impairment in activities of daily living (ADLs; OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.6-2.6), and impairment in instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs; OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.3-2.8). Potentially modifiable prognostic factors such as psychotropic medication use (OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.4-3.6) and smoking status (OR 1.8 95% CI 1.3-2.4) were also identified. Caregiver support was associated with lower odds of postoperative delirium (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.52-0.91).DiscussionThough caution must be used in interpreting meta-analyses of non-randomized studies due to the potential influence of unmeasured confounding, we identified potentially modifiable prognostic factors including frailty and psychotropic medication use that should be targeted to optimize care.
| S-EPMC5880753 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOlder adults with COVID-19 are more likely to present with atypical symptoms, notably delirium. The main objective of this meta-analysis is to identify risk factors for delirium and outcomes of delirium in hospitalized older adults (65 years or above) with COVID-19.MethodsComprehensive literature search of Embase, CINAHIL, Medline and Web of Science was performed for published literature until 31st August 2021. Two independent researchers evaluated study eligibility and assessed study quality using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) for cohort studies and Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal tools for case series. The association of various predisposing factors with delirium in this cohort was reported as odds ratio (OR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI).ResultsA total of 31 studies from 11 countries were included in this review. Most of the included studies investigated patients from non-ICU settings (n = 24; 77.4%). Frailty (OR 3.52, 95% CI: 1.96-6.31, p<0.0001, I2=71.63%), cognitive impairment including dementia (OR 6.17, 95% CI: 2.92-13.07, p<0.00001, I2=88.63%) and being nursing home residents (OR 1.72, 95% CI: 1.31-2.24, p<0.0001, I2=0) were significantly associated with increased likelihood of developing delirium in older adults with COVID-19. The presence of delirium also significantly increases mortality risk in hospitalized older adults with COVID-19 (OR 2.51, 95% CI: 1.51-4.17, p<0.0001, I2=89.3%).ConclusionOur review identifies key factors associated with increased risk of developing delirium in hospitalized older adults with COVID-19. Identification of patients at risk of delirium and attention to these factors early during admission may improve outcomes for this vulnerable cohort.
| S-EPMC9894681 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveDetection of delirium in hospitalised older adults is recommended in national and international guidelines. The 4 'A's Test (4AT) is a short (<2 minutes) instrument for delirium detection that is used internationally as a standard tool in clinical practice. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy of the 4AT for delirium detection.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, clinicaltrials.gov and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, from 2011 (year of 4AT release on the website www.the4AT.com) until 21 December 2019. Inclusion criteria were: older adults (≥65 years); diagnostic accuracy study of the 4AT index test when compared to delirium reference standard (standard diagnostic criteria or validated tool). Methodological quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. Pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity were generated from a bivariate random effects model.ResultsSeventeen studies (3,702 observations) were included. Settings were acute medicine, surgery, a care home and the emergency department. Three studies assessed performance of the 4AT in stroke. The overall prevalence of delirium was 24.2% (95% CI 17.8-32.1%; range 10.5-61.9%). The pooled sensitivity was 0.88 (95% CI 0.80-0.93) and the pooled specificity was 0.88 (95% CI 0.82-0.92). Excluding the stroke studies, the pooled sensitivity was 0.86 (95% CI 0.77-0.92) and the pooled specificity was 0.89 (95% CI 0.83-0.93). The methodological quality of studies varied but was moderate to good overall.ConclusionsThe 4AT shows good diagnostic test accuracy for delirium in the 17 available studies. These findings support its use in routine clinical practice in delirium detection.Prospero registration numberCRD42019133702.
| S-EPMC8099016 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Malnutrition is a common yet under-recognized problem in hospitalized patients. The aim of this paper was to systematically review and evaluate malnutrition biomarkers among order adults. Eligible studies were identified through Cochrane, PubMed and the ProQuest Dialog. A meta-regression was performed on concentrations of biomarkers according to malnutrition risks classified by validated nutrition assessment tools. A total of 111 studies were included, representing 52,911 participants (55% female, 72 ± 17 years old) from various clinical settings (hospital, community, care homes). The estimated BMI (p < 0.001) and concentrations of albumin (p < 0.001), hemoglobin (p < 0.001), total cholesterol (p < 0.001), prealbumin (p < 0.001) and total protein (p < 0.05) among subjects at high malnutrition risk by MNA were significantly lower than those without a risk. Similar results were observed for malnutrition identified by SGA and NRS-2002. A sensitivity analysis by including patients with acute illness showed that albumin and prealbumin concentrations were dramatically reduced, indicating that they must be carefully interpreted in acute care settings. This review showed that BMI, hemoglobin, and total cholesterol are useful biomarkers of malnutrition in older adults. The reference ranges and cut-offs may need to be updated to avoid underdiagnosis of malnutrition.
| S-EPMC5579622 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeDelirium has been recognized as an atypical presenting feature of COVID-19 in older adults and is independently associated with mortality. We aimed to perform an updated systematic review of the literature and proportional meta-analysis to assess prevalence and incidence of delirium in older adults with COVID-19, addressing differences according to sex, frailty status, and settings.MethodsWe searched databases for English-language articles on prevalence and incidence of delirium in older adults with COVID-19, published between March 2020 and January 2023.ResultsOf the 1171 articles identified, 66 met selection criteria and were included in the meta-analysis (n = 35,035 participants, age-range 66-90 years old, 46.6% females). We observed similar pooled prevalence (20.6% [95% Confidence Interval (CI) 17.8-23.8%]) and incidence (21.3% [95% CI 14.7-30%]) of delirium. Pooled occurrence (both prevalence and incidence) of delirium was similar according to sex (females 21.3% [95% CI 16-27.5%] vs. males 23.8%% [95% CI 18.2-30.4%], p-value = 0.55) and study setting (nursing homes 22.5% [95% CI 14.2-33.6%] vs. hospital 20.3% [95% CI 17-24%], p = 0.68), but it was significantly higher in frail versus non-frail patients (37% [95% CI 26.6-48.8%] vs. 12.5% [95% CI 7.8-19.6%], p-value < 0.01). Delirium definitions and assessment tools largely varied across studies.ConclusionThis review delineates delirium as a common feature of COVID-19, particularly in frail older adults, and supports its formal inclusion among COVID-19 symptoms. The considerable heterogeneity in delirium assessment highlights the need for an operational strategy to standardize definitions and tools utilization in the management of frail older adults.
| S-EPMC10997697 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPostoperative delirium (POD) is an important complication for older patients and recent randomised controlled trials have showed a conflicting result of the effect of deep and light anesthesia.MethodsWe included randomised controlled trials including older adults that evaluated the effect of anesthetic depth on postoperative delirium from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library. We considered deep anesthesia as observer's assessment of the alertness/ sedation scale (OAA/S) of 0-2 or targeted bispectral (BIS) < 45 and the light anesthesia was considered OAA/S 3-5 or targeted BIS > 50. The primary outcome was incidence of POD within 7 days after surgery. And the secondary outcomes were mortality and cognitive function 3 months or more after surgery. The quality of evidence was assessed via the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation approach.ResultsWe included 6 studies represented 7736 patients aged 60 years and older. We observed that the deep anesthesia would not increase incidence of POD when compared with the light anesthesia when 4 related studies were pooled (OR, 1.40; 95% CI, 0.63-3.08, P = 0.41, I2 = 82%, low certainty). And no significant was found in mortality (OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.93-1.35, P = 0.23, I2 = 0%, high certainty) and cognitive function (OR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.67-1.91, P = 0.64, I2 = 13%, high certainty) 3 months or more after surgery between deep anesthesia and light anesthesia.ConclusionsLow-quality evidence suggests that light general anesthesia was not associated with lower POD incidence than deep general anesthesia. And High-quality evidence showed that anesthetic depth did not affect the long-term mortality and cognitive function.Systematic review registrationCRD42022300829 (PROSPERO).
| S-EPMC10629190 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveSystematically review and critically appraise the evidence for the association between delirium and falls in community-dwelling adults aged ≥60 years.MethodsWe searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, CINAHL and Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews databases in April 2023. Standard methods were used to screen, extract data, assess risk of bias (using Newcastle-Ottawa scale), provide a narrative synthesis and, where appropriate, conduct meta-analysis.ResultsWe included 8 studies, with at least 3505 unique participants. Five found limited evidence for an association between delirium and subsequent falls: one adjusted study showed an increase in falls (risk ratio 6.66; 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.16-20.53), but the evidence was low certainty. Four non-adjusted studies found no clear effect. Three studies (one with two subgroups treated separately) found some evidence for an association between falls and subsequent delirium: meta-analysis of three adjusted studies showed an increase in delirium (pooled odds ratio 2.01; 95% CI 1.52-2.66); one subgroup of non-adjusted data found no clear effect. Number of falls and fallers were reported in the studies. Four studies and one subgroup were at high risk of bias and one study had some concerns.ConclusionsWe found limited evidence for the association between delirium and falls. More methodologically rigorous research is needed to understand the complex relationship and establish how and why this operates bidirectionally. Studies must consider confounding factors such as dementia, frailty and comorbidity in their design, to identify potential modifying factors involved. Clinicians should be aware of the potential relationship between these common presentations.
| S-EPMC11649760 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionDelirium is associated with future dementia progression. Yet whether this occurs subclinically over months and years, or persistent delirium merges into worsened dementia is not understood. Our objective was to estimate the prevalence of persistent delirium and understand variation in its duration.MethodsWe adopted an identical search strategy to a previous systematic review, only including studies using a recognised diagnostic framework for ascertaining delirium at follow-up (persistent delirium). Studies included hospitalised older patients outside critical and palliative care settings. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews on 11th January 2022. We applied risk of bias assessments based on Standards of Reporting of Neurological Disorders criteria and assessed strength of recommendations using the grading of recommendation, assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) approach. Estimates were pooled across studies using random-effects meta-analysis, and we estimated associations with follow-up duration using robust error meta-regression.ResultsWe identified 13 new cohorts, which we added to 10 from the previous systematic review (23 relevant studies, with 39 reports of persistent delirium at 7 time-points in 3186 individuals admitted to hospital care (mean age 82 years and 41% dementia prevalence). Studies were mainly at moderate risk of bias. Pooled delirium prevalence estimates at discharge were 36% (95% CI 22% to 51%, 13 studies). Robust error meta-regression did not show variation in prevalence of persistent delirium over time (-1.6% per month, 95% CI -4.8 to 1.6, p=0.08). Margins estimates for this model indicate a prevalence of persistent delirium of 16% (95% CI 6% to 25%) at 12 months.ConclusionsThis systematic review emphasises the importance of delirium as a persistent and extensive problem (GRADE certainty = moderate), raising questions on chronic delirium as a clinical entity and how it might evolve into dementia. Addressing persistent delirium will require a whole-system, integrated approach to detect, follow-up and implement opportunities for recovery across all healthcare settings.
| S-EPMC7614331 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionPostoperative delirium (POD) is a major cause of morbidity, particularly in elderly patients. Melatonin has been suggested as a low-risk pharmacological intervention to help prevent POD. A previous systematic review found limited high-quality evidence to support the use of melatonin in the prevention of POD. Several further randomised studies have since been published. This systematic review aims to synthesise the evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) examining the effect of melatonin on the prevention of POD in older adults.Methods and analysisA systematic search of RCTs of melatonin (any dose and formulation) in POD will be run across Embase, Medline, CINAHL and PsychInfo. RCTs published from January 1990 until the end of February 2022 and reporting outcomes for melatonin use to prevent POD in patients will be included. Screening of search results and data extraction from included articles will be performed by two independent reviewers. The primary outcome will be incidence of POD in older adults undergoing surgery. Secondary outcomes are delirium duration and length of hospital stay. The review will also describe the dosage, timing and administration regimes of melatonin therapy and as well as the scales and definitions used to describe POD. A registry review of ongoing trials will be also be performed. For the meta-analysis, data will be pooled using a random effects model to generate a forest plot and obtain an odds ratio (OR) for the incidence of POD. Results will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement.Ethics and disseminationNo ethical approval is required. This review will be disseminated via peer-reviewed manuscript and conferences. The results will be used as the basis of work to optimise this intervention for future trials in surgical populations.Prospero registration numberThis review is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021285019).
| S-EPMC9511532 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionDelirium is commonly missed in older adults presenting to the emergency department (ED). Although current recommendations for active screening of delirium in the ED, this might not be feasible or practical. Identifying patients at high risk for prevalent and incident delirium in the ED will help to improve the screening process and to build interventions. There is currently scattered synthesis of evidence on risk factors associated with delirium in the ED. To address this gap, we are conducting a systematic review to describe the risk factors (patient vulnerability factors and precipitating factors) for delirium in the ED.Methods and analysisA literature search was performed from inception to March 2020 in Ovid EBM Reviews, Ovid EMBASE, Ovid MEDLINE, Scopus and Web of Science. We will include original research studies that report a quantitative relationship between at least one risk factor and delirium in the ED setting. Two investigators will use eligibility criteria from this protocol to independently screen titles and abstracts, and select studies based on full-text review of potentially eligible studies. After arriving at a final set of included studies, two investigators will extract data using a standardised data collection form. If appropriate, data regarding each risk factor will be pooled through a random-effect meta-analysis. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach will be used to evaluate the overall quality of evidence.Ethics and disseminationTo our knowledge, this will be the first systematic review evaluating risk factors for prevalent and incident delirium specifically related to the ED setting. Results of this study will aid in the identification of older adults at risk for delirium in the ED. We aim to publish the results of this systematic review in a peer-reviewed journal with good visibility for the fields of emergency medicine and geriatrics.PROSPERO registration numberCDR42020175261.
| S-EPMC7375496 | biostudies-literature