Delirium: a diagnostic dilemma. Part 1.

Effective symptom management for a patient with a palliative diagnosis can be challenging. There are some symptoms that may be more difficult to control and understand than others. Delirium, as a symptom, may well prove to be a significant challenge for all involved, leaving family and health professionals perplexed and exhausted. Understanding the predisposing factors and the manifestations may aid the health professional in the assessment and identification of this distressing symptom, facilitating more effective management and care of those who are approaching the end of life. This article attempts to address some of the challenges and offer a number of suggestions that may aid in identifying delirium in patients at the end of life, but also examines some of the dilemmas when attempting to treat delirium.N/

Delirium: assessment and treatment of patients with cancer PART 2

Delirium at the end of life may present significant ethical dilemmas in clinical practice: whether to simply treat it in order to maximise symptom relief, with the resulting side effect being palliative sedation, or to attempt to reverse delirium and risk prolonging suffering. Determining whether the delirium can be reversed involves comprehensive assessment using established tools, which may or may not provide the answer to the question posed. This article examines the evidence surrounding several assessment tools that have been suggested as effective in identifying delirium, and the consequences of various approaches to the management of delirium in a patient with a cancer diagnosis. It also considers the impact delirium may have on the health professional and those close to the patient.N/

Trends in referrals to liaison psychiatry teams from UK emergency departments for patients over 65

INTRODUCTION: The number of people over the age of 65 attending Emergency Departments (ED) in the United Kingdom (UK) is increasing. Those who attend with a mental health related problem may be referred to liaison psychiatry for assessment. Improving responsiveness and integration of liaison psychiatry in general hospital settings is a national priority. To do this psychiatry teams must be adequately resourced and organised. However, it is unknown how trends in the number and type referrals of older people to liaison psychiatry teams by EDs are changing, making this difficult. METHODS: We performed a national multi-centre retrospective service evaluation, analysing existing psychiatry referral data from EDs of people over 65. We described trends in the number, rate, age, mental health presentation, and time taken to assessment over a 7 years period. RESULTS: Referral data from 28 EDs across England and Scotland were analysed (n = 18,828 referrals). There was a general trend towards increasing numbers of people referred to liaison psychiatry year on year. Variability in referral numbers between different departments, ranged from 0.1 to 24.3 per 1000 ED attendances. The most common reasons for referral were mood disorders, self-harm and suicidal ideas. The majority of referrals were assessed within 60 min, however there is variability between departments, some recording waits over 11 h. DISCUSSION: The data suggests great inter-departmental variability in referral numbers. Is not possible to establish the cause of variability. However, the data highlights the importance of asking further questions about why the differences exist, and the impact that has on patient care

British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines on the management of functional dyspepsia

Functional dyspepsia (FD) is a common disorder of gut-brain interaction, affecting approximately 7% of individuals in the community, with most patients managed in primary care. The last British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) guideline for the management of dyspepsia was published in 1996. In the interim, substantial advances have been made in understanding the complex pathophysiology of FD, and there has been a considerable amount of new evidence published concerning its diagnosis and classification, with the advent of the Rome IV criteria, and management. The primary aim of this guideline, commissioned by the BSG, is to review and summarise the current evidence to inform and guide clinical practice, by providing a practical framework for evidence-based diagnosis and treatment of patients. The approach to investigating the patient presenting with dyspepsia is discussed, and efficacy of drugs in FD summarised based on evidence derived from a comprehensive search of the medical literature, which was used to inform an update of a series of pairwise and network meta-Analyses. Specific recommendations have been made according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. These provide both the strength of the recommendations and the overall quality of evidence. Finally, in this guideline, we consider novel treatments that are in development, as well as highlighting areas of unmet need and priorities for future research

Cholinesterase inhibitors for the treatment of delirium in non-ICU settings

Background Delirium is a common clinical syndrome defined as alterations in attention with an additional disturbance in cognition or perception, which develop over a short period of time and tend to fluctuate during the course of the episode. Delirium is commonly treated in hospitals or community settings and is often associated with multiple adverse outcomes such as increased cost, morbidity, and even mortality. The first-line intervention involves a multicomponent non-pharmacological approach that includes ensuring effective communication and reorientation in addition to providing reassurance or a suitable care environment. There are currently no drugs approved specifically for the treatment of delirium. Clinically, however, various medications are employed to provide symptomatic relief, such as antipsychotic medications and cholinesterase inhibitors, among others. Objectives To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of cholinesterase inhibitors for treating people with established delirium in a non-intensive care unit (ICU) setting. Search methods We searched ALOIS, which is the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's Specialised Register, on 26 October 2017. We also cross-checked the reference lists of included studies to identify any potentially eligible trials. Selection criteria We included randomised controlled trials, published or unpublished, reported in English or Chinese, which compared cholinesterase inhibitors to placebo or other drugs intended to treat people with established delirium in a non-ICU setting. Data collection and analysis We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. The primary outcomes were duration of delirium, severity of delirium, and adverse events. The secondary outcomes were use of rescue medications, persistent cognitive impairment, length of hospitalisation, institutionalisation, mortality, cost of intervention, leaving the study early, and quality of life. For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated the risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs); for continuous outcomes we calculated the mean difference (MD) with 95% CIs. We assessed the quality of evidence using GRADE to generate a 'Summary of findings' table. Main results We included one study involving 15 participants from the UK. The included participants were diagnosed with delirium based on the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) criteria. Eight males and seven females were included, with a mean age of 82.5 years. Seven of the 15 participants had comorbid dementia at baseline. The risk of bias was low in all domains. The study compared rivastigmine with placebo. We did not find any clear differences between the two groups in terms of duration of delirium (MD -3.6, 95% CI -15.6 to 8.4), adverse events (nausea, RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.01 to 6.29), use of rescue medications (RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.1), mortality (RR 0.10, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.56), and leaving the study early (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.07 to 11.54). Evidence was not available regarding the severity of delirium, persistent cognitive impairment, length of hospitalisation, cost of intervention, or other predefined secondary outcomes. The quality of evidence is low due to the very small sample size. Authors' conclusions There is insufficient evidence to support or refute the use of cholinesterase inhibitors for the treatment of delirium in non-ICU settings. No clear benefits or harms associated with cholinesterase inhibitors were observed when compared with placebo due to the lack of data. More trials are required

The protocol of the Oslo Study of Clonidine in Elderly Patients with Delirium; LUCID:a randomised placebo-controlled trial

Background Delirium affects 15% of hospitalised patients and is linked with poor outcomes, yet few pharmacological treatment options exist. One hypothesis is that delirium may in part result from exaggerated and/or prolonged stress responses. Dexmedetomidine, a parenterally-administered alpha2-adrenergic receptor agonist which attenuates sympathetic nervous system activity, shows promise as treatment in ICU delirium. Clonidine exhibits similar pharmacodynamic properties and can be administered orally. We therefore wish to explore possible effects of clonidine upon the duration and severity of delirium in general medical inpatients. Methods/Design The Oslo Study of Clonidine in Elderly Patients with Delirium (LUCID) is a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blinded, parallel group study with 4-month prospective follow-up. We will recruit 100 older medical inpatients with delirium or subsyndromal delirium in the acute geriatric ward. Participants will be randomised to oral clonidine or placebo until delirium free for 2 days (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) criteria), or after a maximum of 7 days treatment. Assessment of haemodynamics (blood pressure, heart rate and electrocardiogram) and delirium will be performed daily until discharge or a maximum of 7 days after end of treatment. The primary endpoint is the trajectory of delirium over time (measured by Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale). Secondary endpoints include the duration of delirium, use of rescue medication for delirium, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of clonidine, cognitive function after 4 months, length of hospital stay and need for institutionalisation. Discussion LUCID will explore the efficacy and safety of clonidine for delirium in older medical inpatients. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01956604 . EudraCT Number: 2013-000815-2

THE RELATIONSHIP OF DOMAIN SPACING, GRAIN SIZE, SHEET THICKNESS AND POWER LOSS

On a mesuré la position des parois de Bloch parallèles dans des grains individuels de tôle de transformateur (Fe-Si à 3 %). Les mesures ont été faites sur deux épaisseurs de tôle, en différents points du cycle d'hystérèses, dans la gamme de fréquence 20-150 Hz. Les parois se déplacent uniformément de manière répétitive, la distance entre parois reste indépendante de la fréquence mais les parois prennent une certaine courbure. La puissance totale perdue dans les mêmes grains a été mesurée pour diverses densités de flux dans la gamme 10-150 Hz. Le minimum de perte survient dans les matériaux de 0,013 in (0,033 cm) d'épaisseur pour une taille de grain de 0,7 cm, et à 0,010 in (0,025 cm) pour une taille de grain inférieure.Measurements of the position of parallel-bar domain walls at various points on the magnetizing cycle have been made over the frequency range 20-150 Hz in individual grains in two thicknesses of 3 % silicon-iron transformer steel. The walls moved uniformly and repetitively, and the wall spacing was independent of the frequency, but wall bowing was found to occur. The total power loss in the same grains has been measured at various flux densities in the frequency range 10-150 Hz. Minimum total power loss occurs in 0.013 in (0.033 cm) thick material at a grain size of 0.7 cm and a similar result is found to apply to 0.010 in (0.025 cm) at a smaller grain length