scholarly journals 2450 Delirium and catatonia: Age matters

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (S1) ◽  
pp. 39-39
Author(s):  
Jo E. Wilson ◽  
Richard Carlson ◽  
Maria C. Duggan ◽  
Pratik Pandharipande ◽  
Timothy D. Girard ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Critically Ill ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Medical Illness ◽  
Ratio Test ◽  
Variable Effect ◽  
Abnormal Movements ◽  
Simple Logistic Regression Model ◽  
Effect Measure Modification ◽  
Simple Logistic

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Background: Delirium is a well described form of acute brain organ dysfunction characterized by decreased or increased movement, changes in attention and concentration as well as perceptual disturbances (i.e., hallucinations) and delusions. Catatonia, a neuropsychiatric syndrome traditionally described in patients with severe psychiatric illness, can present as phenotypically similar to delirium and is characterized by increased, decreased and/or abnormal movements, staring, rigidity, and mutism. Delirium and catatonia can co-occur in the setting of medical illness, but no studies have explored this relationship by age. Our objective was to assess whether advancing age and the presence of catatonia are associated with delirium. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Methods: We prospectively enrolled critically ill patients at a single institution who were on a ventilator or in shock and evaluated them daily for delirium using the Confusion Assessment for the ICU and for catatonia using the Bush Francis Catatonia Rating Scale. Measures of association (OR) were assessed with a simple logistic regression model with catatonia as the independent variable and delirium as the dependent variable. Effect measure modification by age was assessed using a Likelihood ratio test. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Results: We enrolled 136 medical and surgical critically ill patients with 452 matched (concomitant) delirium and catatonia assessments. Median age was 59 years (IQR: 52–68). In our cohort of 136 patients, 58 patients (43%) had delirium only, 4 (3%) had catatonia only, 42 (31%) had both delirium and catatonia, and 32 (24%) had neither. Age was significantly associated with prevalent delirium (i.e., increasing age associated with decreased risk for delirium) (p=0.04) after adjusting for catatonia severity. Catatonia was significantly associated with prevalent delirium (p<0.0001) after adjusting for age. Peak delirium risk was for patients aged 55 years with 3 or more catatonic signs, who had 53.4 times the odds of delirium (95% CI: 16.06, 176.75) than those with no catatonic signs. Patients 70 years and older with 3 or more catatonia features had half this risk. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Conclusions: Catatonia is significantly associated with prevalent delirium even after controlling for age. These data support an inverted U-shape risk of delirium after adjusting for catatonia. This relationship and its clinical ramifications need to be examined in a larger sample, including patients with dementia. Additionally, we need to assess which acute brain syndrome (delirium or catatonia) develops first.

scholarly journals 3217 Catatonia, Delirium and Coma: Implications for Mortality

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (s1) ◽  
pp. 37-37
Author(s):  
Jo Ellen Wilson ◽  
Sarasota Mihalko ◽  
Stephan Heckers ◽  
Pratik P. Pandharipande ◽  
Timothy D. Girard ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Survival Time ◽  
Critically Ill ◽  
Median Survival ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Median Survival Time ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Brain Dysfunction ◽  
Survival Times ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Acute Brain Dysfunction

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: Delirium, a form of acute brain dysfunction, characterized by changes in attention and alertness, is a known independent predictor of mortality in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). We sought to understand whether catatonia, a more recently recognized form of acute brain dysfunction, is associated with increased 30-day mortality in critically ill older adults. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We prospectively enrolled critically ill patients at a single institution who were on a ventilator or in shock and evaluated them daily for delirium using the Confusion Assessment for the ICU and for catatonia using the Bush Francis Catatonia Rating Scale. Coma, was defined as a Richmond Agitation Scale score of −4 or −5. We used the Cox Proportional Hazards model predicting 30-day mortality after adjusting for delirium, coma and catatonia status. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: We enrolled 335 medical, surgical or trauma critically ill patients with 1103 matched delirium and catatonia assessments. Median age was 58 years (IQR: 48 - 67). Main indications for admission to the ICU included: airway disease or protection (32%; N=100) or sepsis and/or shock (25%; N=79. In the unadjusted analysis, regardless of the presence of catatonia, non-delirious individuals have the highest median survival times, while delirious patients have the lowest median survival time. Comparing the absence and presence of catatonia, the presence of catatonia worsens survival (Figure 1). In a time-dependent Cox model, comparing non-delirious individuals, holding catatonia status constant, delirious individuals have 1.72 times the hazards of death (IQR: 1.321, 2.231) while those with coma have 5.48 times the hazards of death (IQR: 4.298, 6.984). For DSM-5 catatonia scores, a 1-unit increase in the score is associated with 1.18 times the hazards of in-hospital mortality. Comparing two individuals with the same delirium status, an individual with a DSM-5 catatonia score of 0 (no catatonia) will have 1.178 times the hazard of death (IQR: 1.086, 1.278), while an individual with a score of 3 catatonia items (catatonia) present will have 1.63 times the hazard of death. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Non-delirious individuals have the highest median survival times, while those who are comatose have the lowest median survival times after a critical illness, holding catatonia status constant. Comparing the absence and presence of catatonia, the presence of catatonia seems to worsen survival. Those individual who are both comatose and catatonic have the lowest median survival time.

Comparison of Self-Reported and Behavioral Pain Assessment Tools in Critically Ill Patients

2018 ◽  
Vol 35 (5) ◽  
pp. 453-460 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rima H. Bouajram ◽  
Christian M. Sebat ◽  
Dawn Love ◽  
Erin L. Louie ◽  
Machelle D. Wilson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Critically Ill ◽  
Pain Assessment ◽  
Critically Ill Patients ◽  
Strong Correlation ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Assessment Method ◽  
Pain Scale ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Pain Scales ◽  
Behavioral Pain Scale

Background:Self-reported and behavioral pain assessment scales are often used interchangeably in critically ill patients due to fluctuations in mental status. The correlation between scales is not well elucidated. The purpose of this study was to describe the correlation between self-reported and behavioral pain scores in critically ill patients.Methods:Pain was assessed using behavioral and self-reported pain assessment tools. Behavioral pain tools included Critical Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) and Behavioral Pain Scale (BPS). Self-reported pain tools included Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) and Wong-Baker Faces Pain Scales. Delirium was assessed using the confusion assessment method for the intensive care unit. Patient preference regarding pain assessment method was queried. Correlation between scores was evaluated.Results:A total of 115 patients were included: 67 patients were nondelirious and 48 patients were delirious. The overall correlation between self-reported (NRS) and behavioral (CPOT) pain scales was poor (0.30, P = .018). In patients without delirium, a strong correlation was found between the 2 behavioral pain scales (0.94, P < .0001) and 2 self-reported pain scales (0.77, P < .0001). Self-reported pain scale (NRS) and behavioral pain scale (CPOT) were poorly correlated with each other (0.28, P = .021). In patients with delirium, there was a strong correlation between behavioral pain scales (0.86, P < .0001) and a moderate correlation between self-reported pain scales (0.69, P < .0001). There was no apparent correlation between self-reported (NRS) and behavioral pain scales (CPOT) in patients with delirium (0.23, P = .12). Most participants preferred self-reported pain assessment.Conclusion:Self-reported pain scales and behavioral pain scales cannot be used interchangeably. Current validated behavioral pain scales may not accurately reflect self-reported pain in critically ill patients.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document