Xuemiao Tang, Jia Li, Bo Yang, Chong Lei, Hailong Dong
{"title":"睡眠干预对术后谵妄的疗效:随机对照试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析","authors":"Xuemiao Tang, Jia Li, Bo Yang, Chong Lei, Hailong Dong","doi":"10.1007/s44254-023-00027-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Sleep disturbances are risk factors for postoperative delirium (POD), and sleep interventions have been proposed as potential preventive measures. However, the effectiveness of sleep interventions in preventing POD is uncertain. We performed a systematic literature search using the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases from inception until December 24, 2022. We included randomized controlled trials on sleep interventions and POD in adult surgery patients. The screening of titles, abstracts, and full texts was performed independently by two reviewers. Another two reviewers independently performed the data extraction and assessed the risk of bias. Pooled-effect estimates were calculated with a random effect model. Our primary outcome was POD, which was assessed with the confusion assessment method (CAM), CAM for the intensive care unit (CAM-ICU), or other delirium assessment tools. We used trial sequential analysis to control for type I and II statistical errors. We also conducted prespecified subgroup analyses, according to the type of intervention, efficacy of the intervention on postoperative sleep, sample size, participant age, delirium assessment tool used, and the type of surgery. Data were obtained from 25 trials, including 4799 participants. Sleep interventions had a statistically significant difference in the incidence of POD (relative risk (RR) = 0.60; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.46–0.77; I<sup>2</sup> = 58%). Stratified analyses indicated that the beneficial effects of sleep interventions were evident in trials where the interventions promoted postoperative sleep (RR = 0.51; 95% CI, 0.36–0.71) as compared to trials that did not (RR = 1.01; 95% CI, 0.77–1.31) (<i>p</i>-value for interaction between subgroups = 0.004). Our primary analysis demonstrated that in adult patients following elective surgery, interventions that improved postoperative sleep, as compared to the standard care or placebo groups, were associated with a lower risk of POD. However, such evidences are limited by the heterogeneity among trials and the small sample sizes of some trials.</p><h3>Graphical Abstract</h3>\n <div><figure><div><div><picture><source><img></source></picture></div></div></figure></div>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":100082,"journal":{"name":"Anesthesiology and Perioperative Science","volume":"1 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s44254-023-00027-1.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficacy of sleep interventions on postoperative delirium: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials\",\"authors\":\"Xuemiao Tang, Jia Li, Bo Yang, Chong Lei, Hailong Dong\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s44254-023-00027-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Sleep disturbances are risk factors for postoperative delirium (POD), and sleep interventions have been proposed as potential preventive measures. However, the effectiveness of sleep interventions in preventing POD is uncertain. We performed a systematic literature search using the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases from inception until December 24, 2022. We included randomized controlled trials on sleep interventions and POD in adult surgery patients. The screening of titles, abstracts, and full texts was performed independently by two reviewers. Another two reviewers independently performed the data extraction and assessed the risk of bias. Pooled-effect estimates were calculated with a random effect model. Our primary outcome was POD, which was assessed with the confusion assessment method (CAM), CAM for the intensive care unit (CAM-ICU), or other delirium assessment tools. We used trial sequential analysis to control for type I and II statistical errors. We also conducted prespecified subgroup analyses, according to the type of intervention, efficacy of the intervention on postoperative sleep, sample size, participant age, delirium assessment tool used, and the type of surgery. Data were obtained from 25 trials, including 4799 participants. Sleep interventions had a statistically significant difference in the incidence of POD (relative risk (RR) = 0.60; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.46–0.77; I<sup>2</sup> = 58%). Stratified analyses indicated that the beneficial effects of sleep interventions were evident in trials where the interventions promoted postoperative sleep (RR = 0.51; 95% CI, 0.36–0.71) as compared to trials that did not (RR = 1.01; 95% CI, 0.77–1.31) (<i>p</i>-value for interaction between subgroups = 0.004). Our primary analysis demonstrated that in adult patients following elective surgery, interventions that improved postoperative sleep, as compared to the standard care or placebo groups, were associated with a lower risk of POD. However, such evidences are limited by the heterogeneity among trials and the small sample sizes of some trials.</p><h3>Graphical Abstract</h3>\\n <div><figure><div><div><picture><source><img></source></picture></div></div></figure></div>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100082,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Anesthesiology and Perioperative Science\",\"volume\":\"1 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s44254-023-00027-1.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Anesthesiology and Perioperative Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44254-023-00027-1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anesthesiology and Perioperative Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44254-023-00027-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
睡眠障碍是导致术后谵妄(POD)的危险因素,有人提出将睡眠干预作为潜在的预防措施。然而,睡眠干预对预防 POD 的效果尚不确定。我们使用 PubMed、Embase 和 Cochrane Library 数据库进行了系统性文献检索,检索时间从开始到 2022 年 12 月 24 日。我们纳入了有关成人手术患者睡眠干预和 POD 的随机对照试验。标题、摘要和全文的筛选由两名审稿人独立完成。另外两名审稿人独立进行数据提取并评估偏倚风险。采用随机效应模型计算汇总效应估计值。我们的主要研究结果是POD,其评估方法包括混淆评估法(CAM)、重症监护病房CAM(CAM-ICU)或其他谵妄评估工具。我们使用试验序列分析来控制 I 型和 II 型统计误差。我们还根据干预类型、干预对术后睡眠的效果、样本大小、参与者年龄、使用的谵妄评估工具以及手术类型进行了预设亚组分析。数据来自25项试验,包括4799名参与者。睡眠干预对 POD 的发生率有显著的统计学差异(相对风险 (RR) = 0.60;95% 置信区间 (CI),0.46-0.77;I2 = 58%)。分层分析表明,在干预措施促进术后睡眠的试验中(RR = 0.51;95% CI,0.36-0.71),睡眠干预措施的有益效果明显,而在不促进术后睡眠的试验中(RR = 1.01;95% CI,0.77-1.31),睡眠干预措施的有益效果不明显(亚组间交互作用的 P 值 = 0.004)。我们的主要分析表明,对于接受择期手术的成年患者,与标准护理组或安慰剂组相比,改善术后睡眠的干预措施与较低的 POD 风险相关。然而,由于各试验之间存在异质性,且一些试验的样本量较小,因此这些证据受到了限制。
Efficacy of sleep interventions on postoperative delirium: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Sleep disturbances are risk factors for postoperative delirium (POD), and sleep interventions have been proposed as potential preventive measures. However, the effectiveness of sleep interventions in preventing POD is uncertain. We performed a systematic literature search using the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases from inception until December 24, 2022. We included randomized controlled trials on sleep interventions and POD in adult surgery patients. The screening of titles, abstracts, and full texts was performed independently by two reviewers. Another two reviewers independently performed the data extraction and assessed the risk of bias. Pooled-effect estimates were calculated with a random effect model. Our primary outcome was POD, which was assessed with the confusion assessment method (CAM), CAM for the intensive care unit (CAM-ICU), or other delirium assessment tools. We used trial sequential analysis to control for type I and II statistical errors. We also conducted prespecified subgroup analyses, according to the type of intervention, efficacy of the intervention on postoperative sleep, sample size, participant age, delirium assessment tool used, and the type of surgery. Data were obtained from 25 trials, including 4799 participants. Sleep interventions had a statistically significant difference in the incidence of POD (relative risk (RR) = 0.60; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.46–0.77; I2 = 58%). Stratified analyses indicated that the beneficial effects of sleep interventions were evident in trials where the interventions promoted postoperative sleep (RR = 0.51; 95% CI, 0.36–0.71) as compared to trials that did not (RR = 1.01; 95% CI, 0.77–1.31) (p-value for interaction between subgroups = 0.004). Our primary analysis demonstrated that in adult patients following elective surgery, interventions that improved postoperative sleep, as compared to the standard care or placebo groups, were associated with a lower risk of POD. However, such evidences are limited by the heterogeneity among trials and the small sample sizes of some trials.