Preoperative prediction models for postoperative delirium in cardiac surgery patients - a scoping review.

Mitti Blakø, Dorte Baek Olsen, Marianne Wetendorff Noergaard
{"title":"Preoperative prediction models for postoperative delirium in cardiac surgery patients - a scoping review.","authors":"Mitti Blakø, Dorte Baek Olsen, Marianne Wetendorff Noergaard","doi":"10.1080/10376178.2025.2473930","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Postoperative delirium is believed to be preventable in up to 40% of all cases. Researchers have proposed various preoperative risk prediction models for postoperative delirium in patients undergoing cardiac surgery, however, no consensus exists on which model is the most suitable.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To identify and map existing preoperative risk prediction models, detecting cardiac surgery patients at elevated risk of developing postoperative delirium.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>This scoping review considered cohort and case-control studies eligible if they developed or validated preoperative prediction models for postoperative delirium, in adult patients admitted for cardiac surgery via sternotomy.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>The primary search was conducted on May 6th, 2022, and a secondary search was conducted on September 18th, 2024. We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, and PsycINFO where 2126 references were identified and 15 were included for full-text analysis.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This scoping review was conducted in line with the Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (the PRISMA-ScR) guideline.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twelve unique risk prediction models and three validation studies were included in this review, comprising between 77 and 45,744 participants. In total, 157 candidate prognostic variables were investigated of which 40 had a predictive value and thus, were included in the prediction models. The included models revealed an AUC from 0.68-0.93 in the derivation cohorts and 0.61-0.89 in the validation cohorts.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Twelve unique prediction models and 3 validation studies were identified and mapped. Collectively, the models demonstrated an AUC ranging from 0.61-0.93, indicating a fair to good discrimination performance.</p><p><strong>Protocol registration: </strong>A protocol is registered at Open Science Framework (OSF) https://osf.io/wr93y/?view_only=d129c3bb6be04357bac35c2c41ba2a40.</p>","PeriodicalId":93954,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary nurse","volume":" ","pages":"1-19"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contemporary nurse","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10376178.2025.2473930","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Postoperative delirium is believed to be preventable in up to 40% of all cases. Researchers have proposed various preoperative risk prediction models for postoperative delirium in patients undergoing cardiac surgery, however, no consensus exists on which model is the most suitable.

Aim: To identify and map existing preoperative risk prediction models, detecting cardiac surgery patients at elevated risk of developing postoperative delirium.

Design: This scoping review considered cohort and case-control studies eligible if they developed or validated preoperative prediction models for postoperative delirium, in adult patients admitted for cardiac surgery via sternotomy.

Data sources: The primary search was conducted on May 6th, 2022, and a secondary search was conducted on September 18th, 2024. We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, and PsycINFO where 2126 references were identified and 15 were included for full-text analysis.

Method: This scoping review was conducted in line with the Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (the PRISMA-ScR) guideline.

Results: Twelve unique risk prediction models and three validation studies were included in this review, comprising between 77 and 45,744 participants. In total, 157 candidate prognostic variables were investigated of which 40 had a predictive value and thus, were included in the prediction models. The included models revealed an AUC from 0.68-0.93 in the derivation cohorts and 0.61-0.89 in the validation cohorts.

Conclusions: Twelve unique prediction models and 3 validation studies were identified and mapped. Collectively, the models demonstrated an AUC ranging from 0.61-0.93, indicating a fair to good discrimination performance.

Protocol registration: A protocol is registered at Open Science Framework (OSF) https://osf.io/wr93y/?view_only=d129c3bb6be04357bac35c2c41ba2a40.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Preoperative prediction models for postoperative delirium in cardiac surgery patients - a scoping review. Managing intravenous potassium infusion: a quality improvement study on clinician's beliefs and practice. A contemporary approach to improve understanding of the midwifery student continuity of care experience: designing an infographic using appreciative inquiry. Engagement, satisfaction and motivation in online and hybrid learning environments among nursing students: a cross-sectional comparative study. Exploring first nations nursing and midwifery leadership development: an international scoping review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1