Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Delirium in Intensive Care Units Perceptions Of.6
Delirium in Intensive Care Units Perceptions Of.6
Delirium is an indicator of morbidity and mortality in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. It can lead
to negative outcomes and longer hospital stays, thus increasing hospital costs. Despite national
recommendations for daily assessment of delirium, it remains underdiagnosed. Many studies point
to a lack of knowledge among health care professionals to accurately detect and manage ICU
delirium. The aim of our study was to assess the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of Palestinian
health care professionals regarding ICU delirium. The results of a cross-section observational study
revealed that delirium appears to be often underrecognized or misdiagnosed in ICUs in Palestine.
Therefore, it is critical to further educate the medical and nursing teams and to promote the use of
validated tools that can aid in the assessment of this condition. In this way, the length of hospital
stays and related health care costs can be reduced. Key words: delirium, delirium assessment
tool, intensive care unit
Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
394 CRITICAL CARE NURSING QUARTERLY/OCTOBER–DECEMBER 2021
Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Delirium in Intensive Care Units 395
delirium assessment. The survey included 12 nurses and physicians were tested using uni-
questions that addressed delirium knowledge variate analysis of variance with a model
and attitude and was measured using a Lik- that also included work experience as a
ert scale, with 1 as “strongly disagree” and factor in the analysis. Significance was de-
5 as “strongly agree.” Questions regarding clared when the P value was less than .05
the importance of risk factors and obstacles (P < .05).
to assessing delirium as well as all other
questions were addressed as either yes/no Ethical considerations
or as multiple-choice questions. Scores mea- The researchers obtained the required eth-
suring degree of agreement and importance ical approval by the ethical committee in
of items were obtained using a 1- to 5-point charge. In addition, formal consent forms
Likert scale (from 1 = strongly disagree or were signed by all participants included
not important to 5 = strongly agree or very in the study after providing them with in-
important). Practices and frequency of inter- formation regarding the study. Finally, the
ventions were also scored on a scale from 1 participants were informed that they had the
(never) to 5 (always); yes/no questions were right to refuse to participate or withdraw
coded as follows: 1 = yes; 2 = no. at any time without any consequences. The
study was approved by the Palestinian Min-
Reliability and validity istry of Health and the Helsinki Committee
The research tool was assessed for relia- under approval number PHRC/HC/319/18.
bility and validity using the following steps:
the initial version of the questionnaire was RESULTS
evaluated by 3 experts in the medical field
(1 physician from the Ministry of Health and 2 The number of completed questionnaires
university academics), and the questionnaire received was 200, 158 (79%) nurses and 42
was adjusted on the basis of their comments (21%) physicians, for an overall response rate
and suggestions. Then the tool was applied of 70.2%. The sample was made up of 75%
to a pilot sample of 5 physicians and 5 nurses, males and 25% females. Moreover, approxi-
and some modifications were made on the ba- mately half of participants (55%) were aged
sis of the obtained feedback. Reliability was 25 to 34 years. And, one-third of them (38.5%)
assessed using the Cronbach α, which ranged had work assignment more than 75% of the
from 0.71 for the knowledge scale to 0.90 time. Years of working were mostly from 2 to
for the scale measuring importance of risk 5 years (48.8%) and 6 to 10 years (28%).
factors. About one-third of the nurses (32.9%) be-
lieved that alternating delirium was the most
Data analysis prevalent type that occurred in the ICU
The data were coded and analyzed using where they worked, whereas 31.0% of the
the Statistical Package for Social Sciences physicians believed that hypoactive delirium
(SPSS) v21.0. Variables measuring the degree occurred most frequently. In addition, 42.4%
of agreement or the importance of items of the nurses reported that delirium can
were obtained using a 5-point Likert scale be detected by identifying periods of fluc-
(from 1 = strongly disagree or not impor- tuating consciousness. Conversely, 45.2% of
tant to 5 = strongly agree or very important). the physicians reported that attention deficit
Basic descriptive statistics (averages and fre- was characteristic of delirium. Most health
quencies) were obtained. The differences care team members (nurses and physicians)
in frequencies between levels of categori- agreed that delirium leads to increased health
cal variables were tested using Fisher’s exact care costs and prolonged mechanical ventila-
test. The differences in mean scores of agree- tion. Significance was observed in this cate-
ments or the importance of items between gory (P < .01). In addition, a consensus was
Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
396 CRITICAL CARE NURSING QUARTERLY/OCTOBER–DECEMBER 2021
Table 1. Characteristics of Delirium Based on Nurse and Physician Knowledge
Group
reached that delirium is defined as a situation and 3.76 for physicians, with a significant
where patients struggle to maintain attention difference (P < .05).
and organize their thoughts. Table 1 displays Attitudes, perceptions, and current prac-
nurse and physician knowledge related to the tices related to ICU delirium were also
characteristics of delirium. assessed for both health care provider groups.
In regard to attitudes and general knowl- A statistically significant difference was ob-
edge questions, the mean score of physicians served between them when questioned
was 3.76, whereas nurses scored 3.53 on a about the number of times they had read ma-
scale of 1 to 5, with 5 representing the high- terial about delirium within the past year. The
est level of knowledge or positive attitude. majority of nurses (70.3%) reported not hav-
Table 2 displays the average mean scores of ing read anything about delirium during that
nurse and physician knowledge regarding period. Only 54.8% of physicians reported
ICU delirium. Significant differences were the same, whereas 28.6% had read material
not found (P > .05) between nurses and about delirium 2 or 3 times over the past
physicians in all items of the scale except for year. Approximately one-third of the nurses
one attitude statement: Delirium is a prob- and one-third of the physicians reported
lem that requires adequate treatment. The that delirium-related events occurred during
mean score for this item for nurses was 3.53 less than 10% of their shifts, with statistical
Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Delirium in Intensive Care Units 397
Table 2. Average Scores of Knowledge and Attitudes Toward Delirium by Group (Nurses and
Physicians)
Group
significance (P < .05). A high percentage of In terms of nurse and physician percep-
physicians found that delirium occurred in tions regarding the extent to which certain
10% to 25% of ventilated patients, whereas factors contribute to delirium, significance
the majority of nurses observed delirium was observed for sepsis, acute respiratory
in 26% to 50% of ventilated patients, with distress syndrome (ARDS), liver failure, and
significant differences (P < .01). renal failure. In all these cases, physicians
Another significant observation was the had higher mean scores (3.79, 3.69, 3.79, and
frequency of delirium assessment. The ma- 3.69, respectively) than nurses (3.32, 3.16,
jority of both physicians (69%) and nurses 3.39, and 3.32, respectively). Table 4 displays
(88%) reported that they were not perform- the difference between nurse and physi-
ing routine assessments, with a statistically cian perceptions regarding the risk factors of
significant difference (P < .01). Haloperidol delirium.
was reported as the main drug prescribed A majority of nurses and physicians stated
for ICU delirium; however, most respondents that the following were obstacles to assess-
in both groups did not know which side ing delirium: sedation of patients (89.0%),
effects should be monitored after administra- intubation of patients (80.0%), workload
tion of the drug. Significance was observed (78.5%), time consumed by delirium assess-
(P < .01). Table 3 provides statistical informa- ment (71.5%), and complexity of the tool
tion regarding the attitudes, perceptions, and itself (71.0%). Table 5 presents the obstacles
current practices of nurses and physicians to assessing delirium as perceived by nurses
related to ICU delirium. and physicians.
Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
398 CRITICAL CARE NURSING QUARTERLY/OCTOBER–DECEMBER 2021
Group
Nurses Physicians Pa
I have read something about ICU delirium in the .267
past year
Yes 29.1% 38.1%
No 70.9% 61.9%
How many times have you read about delirium in .013
the past year?
0 70.3% 54.8%
1 19.0% 14.3%
2-3 8.9% 28.6%
>3 1.9% 2.4%
In the past 3 y, I have participated in training .611
course on delirium in the ICU
Yes 14.6% 9.5%
No 85.4% 90.5%
What percentage of all your shifts do you have to .048
deal with delirious patients at the ICU?
Never 3.2% 2.4%
<10% of shifts 38.6% 33.3%
10%-30% of shifts 24.7% 47.6%
30%-50% of shifts 23.4% 16.7%
50%-70% of shifts 8.2% 0%
>70% of shifts 1.9% 0%
What percentage of ventilated patients develop .003
delirium according to you?
<10% 18.4% 26.2%
10%-25% 31.0% 54.8%
26%-50% 32.9% 16.7%
51%-75% 13.9% 2.4%
76%-100% 3.8% 0%
Do you routinely assess patients for delirium? .008
Yes 12.0% 31.0%
No 88.0% 69.0%
How often? .003
Not done 88.0% 69.0%
At admission 2.5% 16.7%
Daily 7.0% 11.9%
At discharge 2.5% 2.4%
What is your first-choice drug for delirium in the .001
ICU?
I don’t know 41.1% 16.7%
Haloperidol 47.5% 59.5%
Diazepam 3.2% 2.4%
Propofol 0% 4.8%
Chlorpromazine 2.5% 0%
Midazolam 3.2% 9.5%
Morphine 1.3% 0%
Fentanyl 0.6% 7.1%
Chlorpheniramine maleate 0.6% 0%
(continues )
Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Delirium in Intensive Care Units 399
Group
Nurses Physicians Pa
What side effects do you know or have observed? .004
Respiratory depression 5.7% 19.0%
Decrease level of consciousness 13.3% 21.4%
Sleepy and hypoactive 8.9% 19.0%
Hallucination 13.9% 9.5%
Hypotension 3.2% 2.4%
Don’t know 55.1% 28.6%
According to you, can the routine screening of .754
delirium in the ICU be helpful in improving the
prognosis of critically ill patients?
Yes 53.2% 59.5%
No 46.8% 40.5%
In managing delirium, do you follow a protocol NA
or guidelines?
Yes 0% 0%
No 100% 100%
Table 4. Importance of Risk Factors for Delirium According to Nurses and Physicians
Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
400 CRITICAL CARE NURSING QUARTERLY/OCTOBER–DECEMBER 2021
Table 5. Obstacles to Assessing Delirium
costs as one of its results. It is expected that and personal diligence. Clearly, if assessments
this awareness is derived from their constant are not performed, delirium is bound to be
contact with patients, many of whom exhibit underreported. According to Forsgren and
signs and symptoms of at least one form of Eriksson,24 59% of nurses in their sample
delirium. had performed routine assessments. In addi-
It was also found that physicians acknowl- tion, participants reported delirium in 10% to
edged the need for adequate treatment when 25% of all ventilated patients. This proportion
delirium occurs to a larger extent than nurses. may have been miscalculated because many
It is possible that physicians view ICU delir- evaluators state that ventilation serves as an
ium as a more serious problem than nurses obstacle to assessment.17,25
do. As shown by Arend and Christensen,23 Haloperidol is the first choice of drug used
ICU delirium is a problem requiring treatment to mitigate delirium in all Palestinian hos-
to prevent constant increases in health care pitals included in this study. Unfortunately,
costs. most participants did not know the poten-
Pursuing knowledge and finding methods tial side effects of this drug. Girard et al3
to manage delirium were low among both concluded that haloperidol (Haldol) does not
groups of health care providers, with the significantly affect the duration of ICU delir-
majority of participants indicating that they ium. In addition, many drugs may actually
had not read anything about delirium over cause delirium as a side effect. This was not
the past year. Furthermore, they had only reported by participants as something to be
dealt with delirium cases in less than 10% taken into consideration when assessing or
of their shifts. In addition, the majority of treating delirium.
nurses in our study reported that they had not Significance was observed with ARDS and
performed any delirium assessments. There- liver failure. In both cases, physicians scored
fore, delirium might not have been detected a higher mean score (3.79) than nurses (3.16
in the first place to be even considered for and 3.39, respectively). A systematic review
treatment. This might be a result of circum- regarding the risk factors associated with ICU
stances where the majority of the participants delirium was conducted by Zaal et al.26 They
in our study have not performed routine delir- reported 11 putative risk factors identified
ium assessments. This is due to the lack of by strong or moderate levels of evidence.26
use of a validated tool to assess delirium in Organ (liver) failure was identified with a
Palestinian hospitals, leaving assessment de- moderate level of evidence. Acute respiratory
pendent on health care provider experience failure was supported by an inconclusive
Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Delirium in Intensive Care Units 401
level of evidence.26 In our study, nurses and predominantly nurses (158 of 200; 79%), with
physicians reported liver failure and ARDS only 42 (21%) physicians. In addition, the
as the most ominous risk factors, thereby self-reporting aspect of the questionnaire is a
exhibiting either their lack of awareness limitation because it increases the potential
of the most important risk factors or their for bias. Also, questionnaire items might have
misjudgment regarding the severity of liver been interpreted differently between individ-
failure and ARDS. uals, and data recollected from prior events
Our study found that both the nurses and might not have been equally accurate among
physicians consider that several obstacles ex- the participants.
ist to delirium assessment, and these are sim-
ilar to those reported by other researchers. CONCLUSION
Many have reported that the sedation or
intubation of patients serves as an obsta- Previous studies suggest a lack of knowl-
cle; however, there are studies that indicate edge among health care professionals that
successful assessments regardless of these hinders accurate detection and management
factors.27 Similar to our study, Patel et al28 of ICU delirium. Accordingly, accurate assess-
suggested that ICU delirium screening is time ment and diagnosis of ICU delirium are vital
intensive and Devlin et al29 stated that the for timely treatment. This study highlights in-
complexity of the tool is a barrier to assess- adequate knowledge and a lack of practice of
ment. Therefore, identifying the factors that delirium assessment among Palestinian health
obstruct delirium assessment may contribute care professionals. The majority of health care
to a further understanding of the reasons why providers in our study reported that they had
ICU delirium is frequently underdiagnosed. not performed any previous delirium assess-
ments. As such, there is a pressing need to
promote accredited tools for ICU delirium
Limitations assessment in hospitals and conduct educa-
The small sample size may be considered tional training of the medical and nursing
a limitation in this study. Although the sam- teams in health care facilities related to early
ple included health care professionals from detection and management of ICU delirium
7 different hospitals, the number of ques- in order to improve and simplify the assess-
tionnaires collected from each hospital was ment of delirium, hence improving patient
unequal. In addition, the participants were outcomes.
REFERENCES
1. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and in the ICU during daily care. Intensive Care Med.
Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Washington, 2009;35(7):1276-1280. doi:10.1007/s00134-009-
DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2013. 1466-8.
2. Ramineni A, Dangayach N. Delirium. Mount 6. Mehta S, Cook D, Devlin JW, et al. Prevalence, risk
Sinai Expert Guides. 2020:241-249. doi:10.1002/ factors, and outcomes of delirium in mechanically
9781119293255.ch26. ventilated adults*. Crit Care Med. 2015;43(3):557-
3. Girard TD, Pandharipande PP, Ely EW. Delir- 566. doi:10.1097/ccm.0000000000000727.
ium in the intensive care unit. Crit Care. 2008; 7. Salluh JI, Wang H, Schneider EB, et al. Outcome
12(suppl 3):S3. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/ of delirium in critically ill patients: systematic
articles/PMC2391269. Accessed June 16, 2021. review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2015;350:h2538.
4. Peritogiannis V, Bolosi M, Lixouriotis C, Rizos DV. doi:10.1136/bmj.h3129.
Recent insights on prevalence and correlations 8. Brummel NE, Jackson JC, Pandharipande PP, et al.
of hypoactive delirium. Behav Neurol. 2015;2015: Delirium in the ICU and subsequent long-term dis-
416792. doi:10.1155/2015/416792. ability among survivors of mechanical ventilation*.
5. Spronk PE, Riekerk B, Hofhuis J, Rommes JH. Oc- Crit Care Med. 2014;42(2):369-377. doi:10.1097/
currence of delirium is severely underestimated ccm.0b013e3182a645bd.
Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
402 CRITICAL CARE NURSING QUARTERLY/OCTOBER–DECEMBER 2021
Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.