Delirium detection in Intensive Care patients Willemijn van der Kooi Department of Intensive Care...
-
Upload
willow-yarbough -
Category
Documents
-
view
233 -
download
7
Transcript of Delirium detection in Intensive Care patients Willemijn van der Kooi Department of Intensive Care...
Delirium detection in Intensive Care patients
Willemijn van der KooiDepartment of Intensive Care MedicineUniversity Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands
• Orion Pharma: contributed to printing costs of my thesis
• NPK design: contributed to printing costs of my thesis
Disclosures
Delirium prevalence:•50%-80% for ICU patients•10-15% for cardiac surgery patients
ICU delirium is associated with:•Long term cognitive impairment•Increased hospital and ICU length of stay•Increased mortality
Introduction
* Actor
Delirium often (71%) missed by ICU physicians1
• questionnaires developed for screening
Daily practice• Sensitivity of questionnaire with best performance
(Cam-ICU):–47% in ICU patients2
–28% in post-operative patients3
• Cognitive screening may not fit well in the culture of the ICU
Introduction
1 Van Eijk et al. Crit Care Med 2009;37:1881-52 Van Eijk et al. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2011;184:340-43 Neufeld et al. Br J Anaesth 2013;111:612-8
New approach: delirium detection using physiological alterations
Introduction
Ultimate goal:•2 sensors coupled to a monitor•Monitor shows on a scale the chance of having delirium
Three physiological parameters studied:•Temperature variability•Eye movements•Brain activity (EEG)
Future perspective
Content
Temperature variability during delirium in ICU patients
Van der kooi et al. PLoS One. 2013; 8:e78923
Delirium: manifestation of encephalopathy •In delirium tremens, Wernicke encephalopathy and schizophrenia: temperature regulation is disturbed•Does delirium affect thermoregulation?
Introduction
To investigate whether:
•ICU delirium is related to absolute body temperature
•ICU delirium is related to temperature variability
Aim of the study
• Subjects from 3 previous delirium studies• Daily delirium assessments by research-
nurse/physician
Temperature: measured per minute 24/7
Methods
Inclusion: •Patients with delirious + non-delirious days during ICU admission of >24 hrs
Exclusion criteria: • Disturbed body temperature regulation
(treatment/diagnoses)• Neurological/neurosurgical disease• Days with sepsis, coma or death were excluded
from analysis
*All patients received paracetamol 1000 mg 4 times daily
Methods
Methods
day 1 day 2 day 335
36
37
38te
mpe
ratu
re ( C
)
day 1 day 2 day 30
0.5
1
1.5
2
tem
p ac
c.(
C/m
in2 )
day 1 day 2 day 30.0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
mea
n te
mp
acc.
(C
/min
2 )
A
B
C
Coma No Delirium Delirium
Linear Mixed models: •Univariable (unadjusted) •Multivariable (adjusted for confounders RASS and SOFA)
Outcome: •body temperature [°C]•temperature variability (absolute second derivative) [°C/min2]
Methods
Results
Results
Patient characteristics
Age: mean (SD) 68 (14)
Gender: number of males (%) 15 (63%)
Admission type: number (%)
-internal medicine 3 (12%)
-surgery 12 (50%)
-cardiothoracic surgery 9 (38%)
Delirium type: number (%)
-Hypoactive 6 (25%)
-Hyperactive 0 (0%)
-Mixed type 18 (75%)
Number of analyzed days: median (IQR)
-Delirium 2.0 (1.0)
-Non-delirium 1.0 (1.8)
Body Temperature:
Results
Model Variable Effect estimate 95% Confidence interval p-value
Unadjusted
Delirium [yes] -0.03 -0.17; 0.10 0.61
Adjusted
Delirium [yes] -0.03 -0.17; 0.10 0.63
Rass 0.01 -0.09; 0.10 0.90
Sofa 0.001 -0.04; 0.04 0.95
Temperature Variability:
Results
Model Variable Effect estimate 95% Confidence interval p-value
Unadjusted
Delirium [yes] 0.005 0.003; 0.008 <0.001
Adjusted
Delirium [yes] 0.005 0.002; 0.008 <0.001
Rass -0.001 -0.003; 0.001 0.20
Sofa -0.0001 -0.001; 0.001 0.71
Strengths:
•Delirium diagnoses prospectively
•Within subjects comparisons
•Easy method temperature variability
Limitations
•Possible effect of medication
•Natural circadian rhythm bias
Discussion
Temperature variability: increased during delirium in ICU patients • encephalopathy that underlies delirium
Future studies: •Monitoring temperature variability in total ICU population •Combine with EEG for objective tool to detect delirium
Discussion
Delirium detection based on monitoring of blinks and eye movements
Van der kooi et al. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2014
Delirium associated with change in motor level activity•Actigraphy not practical•Eye movements less affected by muscle weakness, restraints, pain
Introduction
Goal
Determine whether eye blinks and eye movements differ in patients with delirium compared to patients without delirium.
Methods
Population: post-cardiac surgery patientsReference: psychiatrist, geriatrist, neurologist using DSM
4 criteria
Methods
Standard 21 electrode EEG recording (30 minutes) with periods of eyes open and closed
First artifact free minute selected with eyes closed and open
Methods: Eye movements
Eye movements compared between delirium and non-delirium
Number (per min) and duration (sec) of:•Blinks
•Vertical eye movements
•Horizontal eye movements
Results: study population
Delirious patients (n=28)
Non-delirious patients (n=28)
p-value
Age, mean (SD) 76 (5.6) 74 (8.6) 0.16
Gender: male, n (%) 16 (57%) 16 (57%) 1
Apache IV score, median (IQR) 58 (45-65) 43 (35-51) <0.01
Charlson comorbidity index,
median (IQR)
2 (1-3) 1 (0-1) 0.02
Haloperidol use past 24 hours
n (%)
17 (61%) 2 (7%) <0.01
Postsurgical day of EEG,
median (IQR)
3 (2-5) 3 (2-4) 0.78
Results: eye movements
Variable DeliriumMedian (IQR)
Non-deliriumMedian (IQR)
p-value
Number of Vertical eye movements
(min-1)
1 (0-13) 15 (2-54) 0.01
Number of Blinks (min-1) 12 (5-18) 18 (8-25) 0.02
Duration of Blinks (s) 0.50 (0.36-
0.96)
0.34 (0.23-
0.53)
<0.01
Eyes Open
Results: eye movements
Variable DeliriumMedian (IQR)
Non-deliriumMedian (IQR)
p-value
Duration of Horizontal eye
movements (s)
0.41 (0.15-
0.75)
0.08 (0.06-
0.22)
<0.01
Eyes Closed
Results: Eye movements haloperidol
Eyes Variable Delirium with haloperidolMedian (IQR)
Delirium without haloperidol Median (IQR)
p-value
Open Number of vertical eye
movements
2 (0-17) 0 (0-17) 0.69
Open Number of blinks
12 (4-19) 12 (6-17) 0.87
Open Duration of blinks (s) 0.49 (0.39-1.01) 0.52 (0.34-0.93) 0.81
Close
d
Duration of horizontal of
eye movements (s)
0.59 (0.23-1.40) 0.27 (0.13-0.69) 0.19
Conclusion
Especially blinks are affected in delirious patients
Strengths: •non-invasive •Only 1 minute of data necessary
Limitations:•22 electrodes needed for eye movement measurement, except for blinks• Difference in Apache and Charlson Comorbidity score
Future studies: •Detection of eye movements in general population of ICU patients•Determining whether eye movements can detect delirium at early stage
Delirium detection using EEG: what and how to measure?
Van der kooi et al. Chest. 2014
Delirium characterized by EEG abnormalities•EEG not practical
Introduction
Without Delirium With Delirium
Goal
Determine the electrode derivation and EEG characteristic that have the best capability of discriminating delirium from non-delirium
Methods
Standard 21 electrode EEG recording (30 minutes) with periods of eyes open and closed
First artifact free minute selected with eyes closed
Methods: EEG
Eyes closed= 210 different derivations
Methods: EEG
For every derivation 6 parameters: 1
Relative delta power (0.5-4 Hz), Relative theta power (4-8 Hz),Relative
alpha power (8-13 Hz), Relative beta power (13-20 Hz), Peak frequency, Slow-
fast ratio
1van der Kooi, et al. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 2012; 24: 472-477.
Ruwe EEG
δ 0-4 Hz
θ 4-8 Hz
α 8-13 Hz
β 13-20 Hz
Methods: EEG
210 derivations x 6 parameters = 1260 combinations
All 1260 combinations • Compared between delirium and non-delirium (Mann-whitney U)
• P-values ranked
• smallest p-value is optimal combination (Bonferoni correction )
1van der Kooi, et al. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 2012; 24: 472-477.
Results: EEG
Eyes closedRank
p-value* Deriviation
Parameter
1 1.8e-12 F8-Pz Relative δ2 3.7e-12 F8-P3 Relative δ3 1.1e-11 F8-O2 Relative δ4 1.5e-11 Fp2-O1 Relative δ5 1.7e-11 F8-F4 Relative δ6 2.2e-11 F8-O1 Relative δ7 2.4e-11 F8-Cz Relative δ8 2.4e-11 F8-C3 Relative δ9 2.9e-11 Fp2-Pz Relative δ10 3.0e-11 Cz-O1 Relative δ
*p< 4.0*10-5 is significant
Delirium Non-delirium
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
Rel. d
elta
pow
er
F8-Pz
Results: EEG
Most optimal
electrode
locations, based
on first 4
rankings.
Conclusion
EEG easily detects delirium from non-delirium using •2 electrodes in frontal-parietal derivation and relative delta power
Strengths: new approach, non-invasive, only 2 electrodes and 1 minute data necessary
Future studies: •Validation study in unselected population of postoperative- and critically ill patients•Determine whether it recognizes delirium at an early stage
Future Directions
Overall Conclusion
EEG most promising method for delirium detection.
Project started: Development of delirium monitor
Product development
Product and algorithm
Validation study
Goal: To determine sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of the delirium monitor when compared to reference standard (specialized geriatric nurse) in elderly postoperative patients (n=154).
Usability study
• Practical?• Easy to Use?• Opinion of nurses of different medical departments
Extra slides
Results: EEG eyes open
Ogen OpenRang
p-waarde*
Afleiding
Parameter
1 2.0e-07 P7-P4 Relative alpha2 4.2e-07 P3-P4 Relative alpha3 1.6e-06 P7-O1 Relative delta4 3.2e-06 P7-O1 Relative alpha5 3.5e-06 P3-P4 Slow Fast ratio6 4.0e-06 P4-O1 Relative alpha7 6.1e-06 P7-P8 Relative alpha8 7.9e-06 P7-P4 Slow Fast ratio9 9.4e-06 P3-P8 Relative alpha10 1.1e-05 P7-O2 Relative alpha
*p< 5.6*10-4 is significant
Delirium met/zonder haloperidol geen
verschil (p=0.37)
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
0.55
D NDre
l. al
pha
powe
r
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
D ND
rel.
alph
a po
wer
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
D ND
rel.
delta
pow
er
1: P7-P4 2: P3-P4 3: P7-O1
Results: Eye movements eyes openEyes
Variable DeliriumMedian (IQR)
Non-deliriumMedian (IQR)
p-value
AUC (95% CI)
Ope
n
Number of eye
movements
Horizontal
6 (0-51)
n=23
26 (0-55)
n=28
0.54 0.55 (0.39-
0.71)
Vertical
1 (0-13)
n=23
15 (2-54)
n=28
0.01 0.70 (0.55-
0.85)
Blinks
12 (5-18)
n=23
18 (8-25)
n=27
0.02 0.65 (0.50-
0.80)
Ope
n
Duration of eye
movements (s)
Horizontal 0.24 (0.10-
0.56)
n=14
0.14 (0.04-
0.27)
n=17
0.14 0.66 (0.47-
0.85)
Vertical 0.14 (0.06-
0.49)
n=10
0.07 (0.04-
0.60)
n=18
0.46 0.59 (0.37-
0.81)
Blinks 0.50 (0.36-
0.96)
n=20
0.34 (0.23-
0.53)
n=27
<0.01 0.74 (0.59-
0.88)
Results: Eye movements eyes closedEyes Variable Delirium
Median (IQR)
Non-deliriumMedian (IQR)
p-value
AUC (95% CI)
Closed Number of eye
movements
Horizontal
0 (0-42)
n=27
0 (0-51)
n=27
0.37 0.57 (0.41-
0.72)
Vertical
5 (0-47)
n=27
10 (0-52)
n=27
0.40 0.56 (0.41-
0.72)
Closed Duration of eye
movements (s)
Horizontal 0.41 (0.15-
0.75)
n=12
0.08 (0.06-
0.22)
n=13
<0.01 0.81 (0.64-
0.99)
Vertical 0.15 (0.07-
0.29)
n=15
0.07 (0.03-
0.27)
n=17
0.19 0.64 (0.44-
0.84)
Results: Eye movements haloperidolEyes Variable Delirium with
haloperidolMedian (IQR)
Delirium without haloperidol Median (IQR)
p-value
Number of eye
movements
Open Vertical 2 (0-17)
n=14
0 (0-17)
n=9
0.69
Open Blinks
12 (4-19)
n=14
12 (6-17)
n=9
0.87
Duration of eye
movements (s)
Open Blinks 0.49 (0.39-1.01)
n=14
0.52 (0.34-0.93)
n=9
0.81
Close
d
Horizontal 0.59 (0.23-1.40)
n=6
0.27 (0.13-0.69)
n=6
0.19
Stap1 Van onderzoek naar klinische prakti
• Ontwikkeling van delirium monitor– Product– Algoritme
• Validatie studie• Gebruiksvriendelijkheids-
studie
Validatie studie
Doel:
Het bepalen van de sensitiviteit, specificiteit en voorspellende waarden van de delirium monitor in vergelijking met de referentie standaard in oudere postoperatieve patiënten (n=154).
Validatie studie
Inclusie:•≥ 70 jaar•Opname voor grote operatie (min. 2 opname dagen ZH na operatie)•Preoperatieve verhoogde kwetsbaarheid en/of verhoogd risico op delirium
Exclusie:•Geen communicatie mogelijk•Neurologische chirurgische ingreep•Eerdere deelname studie•Patient in isolatie vanwege resistente bacterie
Validatie studie - Studie verloop
OperatieT0 T1 T2 T3
= Delirium monitor
= Referentie standaard
= POS Geriatrische screening
Validatie studie
Delirium monitor•4 elektrodes•5 minuten EEG meting OD•Relatieve δ power
Referentie standaard onderzoeker/vpk•DRS-R-98 Ernst van delirium•VAS (0-10) Kans dat patiënt delirant is•Classificatie Deliriant/Mogelijk delirant/Niet delirant
(Op basis van DSM-V criteria)
Validatie studie - Analyses
• 1e artefact vrije minute relatieve δ power• ROC curve relatieve δ power vs. classificatie
van referentie standaard
Validatie studie - Secundaire doelen
1) Schaal voor ernst van delirium (relatieve δ vs. DRS-R-98)
2) Vroegtijdig herkennen van delirium?
0 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 103
OperatieT0 T1 T2 T3
= Delirium monitor
= Referentie standaard
= Geriatrische screening
Stap2 Van onderzoek naar klinische praktijk
• Gebruiksvriendelijkheidsonderzoek– Handig product?– Ervaring verpleegkundige
Stap3 Van onderzoek naar klinische praktijk
• Delirium monitor bredere doelgroep– Dementie– Neurotrauma– IC: Effect sedatie op EEG
Samenvatting
1) EEG in delirium studie = het idee– Relatieve δ power– Frontaal- Pariëtaal
2) Ontwikkeling prototype3) Validatiestudie 4) Gebruiksvriendelijkheidsstudie5) Hoe krijgen we het naar de IC
Delirium monitor project
UMCU - IC•Arjen Slooter•Willemijn van der Kooi•Tianne Numan•Annemieke Hoekman
Pontes Medical•Rutger van Merkerk
NPK design•Tessa Souhoka•Marlies van Dullemen•Jos Oberdorf
Medische Techniek•Leonard van Schelven•Rene van de Vosse•Bert Westra•Maurice Konings
Geriatrie•Marielle Emmelot-Vonk•Jolanda Peijster- de Waal•Marcel Weterman
KNF•Geert-Jan Huiskamp•Frans Leijten