A pilot study of rivastigmine in the treatment of delirium after stroke: A safe alternative

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Delirium is a common disorder in the early phase of stroke. Given the presumed cholinergic deficiency in delirium, we tested treatment with the acetylcholinesterase inhibitor rivastigmine.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This pilot study was performed within an epidemiological study. In 527 consecutive stroke patients presence of delirium was assessed during the first week with the confusion assessment method. Severity was scored with the delirium rating scale (DRS). Sixty-two patients developed a delirium in the acute phase of stroke. Only patients with a severe and persistent delirium (defined as a DRS of 12 or more for more than 24 hours) were enrolled in the present study. In total 26 fulfilled these criteria of whom 17 were treated with orally administered rivastigmine with a total dose between 3 and 12 mg a day. Eight patients could not be treated because of dysphagia and one because of early discharge.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>No major side effects were recorded. In 16 patients there was a considerable decrease in severity of delirium. The mean DRS declined from 14.8 on day one to 8.5 after therapy and 5.6 after tapering. The mean duration of delirium was 6.7 days (range; 2–17).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Rivastigmine is safe in stroke patients with delirium even after rapid titration. In the majority of patients the delirium improved after treatment. A randomized controlled trial is needed to establish the usefulness of rivastigmine in delirium after stroke.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>Nederlands Trial Register NTR1395</p

Development of a quality indicator set to measure and improve quality of ICU care for patients with traumatic brain injury.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to develop a set of quality indicators for patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) in intensive care units (ICUs) across Europe and to explore barriers and facilitators for implementation of these quality indicators. METHODS: A preliminary list of 66 quality indicators was developed, based on current guidelines, existing practice variation, and clinical expertise in TBI management at the ICU. Eight TBI experts of the Advisory Committee preselected the quality indicators during a first Delphi round. A larger Europe-wide expert panel was recruited for the next two Delphi rounds. Quality indicator definitions were evaluated on four criteria: validity (better performance on the indicator reflects better processes of care and leads to better patient outcome), feasibility (data are available or easy to obtain), discriminability (variability in clinical practice), and actionability (professionals can act based on the indicator). Experts scored indicators on a 5-point Likert scale delivered by an electronic survey tool. RESULTS: The expert panel consisted of 50 experts from 18 countries across Europe, mostly intensivists (N = 24, 48%) and neurosurgeons (N = 7, 14%). Experts agreed on a final set of 42 indicators to assess quality of ICU care: 17 structure indicators, 16 process indicators, and 9 outcome indicators. Experts are motivated to implement this finally proposed set (N = 49, 98%) and indicated routine measurement in registries (N = 41, 82%), benchmarking (N = 42, 84%), and quality improvement programs (N = 41, 82%) as future steps. Administrative burden was indicated as the most important barrier for implementation of the indicator set (N = 48, 98%). CONCLUSIONS: This Delphi consensus study gives insight in which quality indicators have the potential to improve quality of TBI care at European ICUs. The proposed quality indicator set is recommended to be used across Europe for registry purposes to gain insight in current ICU practices and outcomes of patients with TBI. This indicator set may become an important tool to support benchmarking and quality improvement programs for patients with TBI in the future

Variation in Structure and Process of Care in Traumatic Brain Injury: Provider Profiles of European Neurotrauma Centers Participating in the CENTER-TBI Study.

INTRODUCTION: The strength of evidence underpinning care and treatment recommendations in traumatic brain injury (TBI) is low. Comparative effectiveness research (CER) has been proposed as a framework to provide evidence for optimal care for TBI patients. The first step in CER is to map the existing variation. The aim of current study is to quantify variation in general structural and process characteristics among centers participating in the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study. METHODS: We designed a set of 11 provider profiling questionnaires with 321 questions about various aspects of TBI care, chosen based on literature and expert opinion. After pilot testing, questionnaires were disseminated to 71 centers from 20 countries participating in the CENTER-TBI study. Reliability of questionnaires was estimated by calculating a concordance rate among 5% duplicate questions. RESULTS: All 71 centers completed the questionnaires. Median concordance rate among duplicate questions was 0.85. The majority of centers were academic hospitals (n = 65, 92%), designated as a level I trauma center (n = 48, 68%) and situated in an urban location (n = 70, 99%). The availability of facilities for neuro-trauma care varied across centers; e.g. 40 (57%) had a dedicated neuro-intensive care unit (ICU), 36 (51%) had an in-hospital rehabilitation unit and the organization of the ICU was closed in 64% (n = 45) of the centers. In addition, we found wide variation in processes of care, such as the ICU admission policy and intracranial pressure monitoring policy among centers. CONCLUSION: Even among high-volume, specialized neurotrauma centers there is substantial variation in structures and processes of TBI care. This variation provides an opportunity to study effectiveness of specific aspects of TBI care and to identify best practices with CER approaches

Variation in general supportive and preventive intensive care management of traumatic brain injury: a survey in 66 neurotrauma centers participating in the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study

Abstract Background General supportive and preventive measures in the intensive care management of traumatic brain injury (TBI) aim to prevent or limit secondary brain injury and optimize recovery. The aim of this survey was to assess and quantify variation in perceptions on intensive care unit (ICU) management of patients with TBI in European neurotrauma centers. Methods We performed a survey as part of the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study. We analyzed 23 questions focused on: 1) circulatory and respiratory management; 2) fever control; 3) use of corticosteroids; 4) nutrition and glucose management; and 5) seizure prophylaxis and treatment. Results The survey was completed predominantly by intensivists (n = 33, 50%) and neurosurgeons (n = 23, 35%) from 66 centers (97% response rate). The most common cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) target was > 60 mmHg (n = 39, 60%) and/or an individualized target (n = 25, 38%). To support CPP, crystalloid fluid loading (n = 60, 91%) was generally preferred over albumin (n = 15, 23%), and vasopressors (n = 63, 96%) over inotropes (n = 29, 44%). The most commonly reported target of partial pressure of carbon dioxide in arterial blood (PaCO2) was 36–40 mmHg (4.8–5.3 kPa) in case of controlled intracranial pressure (ICP) < 20 mmHg (n = 45, 69%) and PaCO2 target of 30–35 mmHg (4–4.7 kPa) in case of raised ICP (n = 40, 62%). Almost all respondents indicated to generally treat fever (n = 65, 98%) with paracetamol (n = 61, 92%) and/or external cooling (n = 49, 74%). Conventional glucose management (n = 43, 66%) was preferred over tight glycemic control (n = 18, 28%). More than half of the respondents indicated to aim for full caloric replacement within 7 days (n = 43, 66%) using enteral nutrition (n = 60, 92%). Indications for and duration of seizure prophylaxis varied, and levetiracetam was mostly reported as the agent of choice for both seizure prophylaxis (n = 32, 49%) and treatment (n = 40, 61%). Conclusions Practice preferences vary substantially regarding general supportive and preventive measures in TBI patients at ICUs of European neurotrauma centers. These results provide an opportunity for future comparative effectiveness research, since a more evidence-based uniformity in good practices in general ICU management could have a major impact on TBI outcome

Variation in neurosurgical management of traumatic brain injury

Background: Neurosurgical management of traumatic brain injury (TBI) is challenging, with only low-quality evidence. We aimed to explore differences in neurosurgical strategies for TBI across Europe. Methods: A survey was sent to 68 centers participating in the Collaborative European Neurotrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study. The questionnaire contained 21 questions, including the decision when to operate (or not) on traumatic acute subdural hematoma (ASDH) and intracerebral hematoma (ICH), and when to perform a decompressive craniectomy (DC) in raised intracranial pressure (ICP). Results: The survey was completed by 68 centers (100%). On average, 10 neurosurgeons work in each trauma center. In all centers, a neurosurgeon was available within 30 min. Forty percent of responders reported a thickness or volume threshold for evacuation of an ASDH. Most responders (78%) decide on a primary DC in evacuating an ASDH during the operation, when swelling is present. For ICH, 3% would perform an evacuation directly to prevent secondary deterioration and 66% only in case of clinical deterioration. Most respondents (91%) reported to consider a DC for refractory high ICP. The reported cut-off ICP for DC in refractory high ICP, however, differed: 60% uses 25 mmHg, 18% 30 mmHg, and 17% 20 mmHg. Treatment strategies varied substantially between regions, specifically for the threshold for ASDH surgery and DC for refractory raised ICP. Also within center variation was present: 31% reported variation within the hospital for inserting an ICP monitor and 43% for evacuating mass lesions. Conclusion: Despite a homogeneous organization, considerable practice variation exists of neurosurgical strategies for TBI in Europe. These results provide an incentive for comparative effectiveness research to determine elements of effective neurosurgical care

The influence of APACHE II score on the average noise level in an intensive care unit: an observational study

Noise levels in hospitals, especially in intensive care units (ICUs) are known to be high, potentially affecting not only the patients’ well-being but also their clinical outcomes. In an observational study, we made a long-term measurement of noise levels in an ICU, and investigated the influence of various factors on the noise level, including the acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II (APACHE II) score

Patients with Diffuse Axonal Injury Can Recover to a Favorable Long-Term Functional and Quality of Life Outcome

Functional outcome and quality of life are difficult to predict in patients with diffuse axonal injury (DAI) after traumatic brain injury (TBI). The primary aim of this cross-sectional cohort study was to assess the long-term functional outcome in patients with DAI and to identify prognostic factors. Second, health-related quality of life (HRQL) at long-term follow-up was assessed. Patients >= 16 years of age with TBI and DAI (admitted 2008-2014) were included. Clinical and imaging data were collected. The primary outcome parameter was the Glasgow Outcome Scale Extended (GOSE) at long-term follow-up. Second, the HRQL was assessed with the Quality Of Life after Brain Injury (QOLIBRI) questionnaire. DAI was diagnosed in 185 patients. Long-term functional outcome was obtained in 134 patients (72%), median follow-up was 54 months (range 14-100); and 51% had a favorable outcome (GOSE 6-8). Independent prognostic factors were age, pupillary reaction, Hb, DAI grading, and return of consciousnes

Accuracy in prediction of long-term functional outcome in patients with traumatic axonal injury:A comparison of MRI scales

Purpose: Functional outcome prediction for patients with traumatic axonal injury (TAI) is not highly related to the MRI classifications. The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy in predicting functional outcome in patients with TAI with several MRI scoring methods and to define the most accurate method. Methods: Patients with TAI (2008–2014) confirmed on MRI <6 months after injury were included in this retrospective study. Long-term functional outcome was prospectively assessed using the Glasgow Outcome Score Extended. The Gentry classification is most used in clinical practice. This method was compared to methods that score lesion load, lesion locations, and to modified Gentry classifications. The area under the curve (AUC) was calculated for the scoring methods. Results: A total of 124 patients with TAI were included, medium follow-up 52 months. The AUC for the Gentry classification was 0.64. All tested methods were poor predictors for functional outcome, except for the 6-location score (area under the curve: 0.71). No method was significantly better than the Gentry classification. Conclusion: The Gentry classification for TAI correlates with functional outcome, but is a poor predictor for the long-term functional outcome. None of the other tested methods was significantly better

The Impact of Non-Pharmacological Interventions on Delirium in Neurological Intensive Care Unit Patients: A Single-Center Interrupted Time Series Trial

Background: Delirium is a pathobiological brain process that is frequently observed in Intensive Care Unit (ICU) patients, and is associated with longer hospitalization as well as long-term cognitive impairment. In neurological ICU patients, delirium may be more treatment-resistant due to the initial brain injury. This study examined the effects of a multicomponent non-pharmacological nursing intervention program on delirium in neurological ICU patients. Methods: A single-center interrupted time series trial was conducted in adult neurological ICU patients at high risk for developing delirium who were non-delirious at admission. A multicomponent nursing intervention program focusing on modifiable risk factors for delirium, including the optimalization of vision, hearing, orientation and cognition, sleep and mobilization, was implemented as the standard of care, and its effects were studied. The primary outcome was the number of delirium-free and coma-free days alive at 28 days after ICU admission. The secondary outcomes included delirium incidence and duration, ICU and hospital length-of-stay and duration of mechanical ventilation. Results: Of 289 eligible patients admitted to the ICU, 130 patients were included, with a mean age of 68 ± 11 years, a mean APACHE-IV score of 79 ± 25 and a median predicted delirium risk (E-PRE-DELIRIC) score of 42 [IQR 38–50]). Of these, 73 were included in the intervention period and 57 in the control period. The median delirium- and coma-free days alive were 15 days [IQR 0–26] in the intervention group and 10 days [IQR 0–24] in the control group (level change −0.48 days, 95% confidence interval (95%CI) −7 to 6 days, p = 0.87; slope change −0.95 days, 95%CI −2.41 to 0.52 days, p = 0.18). Conclusions: In neurological ICU patients, our multicomponent non-pharmacological nursing intervention program did not change the number of delirium-free and coma-free days alive after 28 days