谵妄的临床处理:反应取决于亚型。602例患者的观察性队列研究

C. Zipser, S. Knoepfel, P. Hayoz, M. Schubert, J. Ernst, R. von Känel, Soenke Boettger
{"title":"谵妄的临床处理:反应取决于亚型。602例患者的观察性队列研究","authors":"C. Zipser, S. Knoepfel, P. Hayoz, M. Schubert, J. Ernst, R. von Känel, Soenke Boettger","doi":"10.1017/S1478951519000609","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Objective The hypoactive, hyperactive, and mixed subtypes of delirium differently impact patient management and prognosis, yet the evidence remains sparse. Therefore, we examined the outcome of varying management strategies in the subtypes of delirium. Methods In this observational cohort study, 602 patients were managed for delirium over 20 days with the following strategies: supportive care alone or in combination with psychotropics, single, dual, or triple+ psychotropic regimens. Cox regression models were calculated for time to remission and benefit rates (BRs) of management strategies. Results Generally, the mixed subtype of delirium caused more severe and persistent delirium, and the hypoactive subtype was more persistent than the hyperactive subtype. The subtypes of delirium were similarly predictive for mortality (P = 0.697) and transfer to inpatient psychiatric care (P = 0.320). In the mixed subtype, overall, psychotropic drugs were administered more often (P = 0.016), and particularly triple+ regimens were administered more commonly compared to hypoactive delirium (P = 0.007). Patients on supportive care benefited most, whereas those on triple+ regimens did worst in terms of remission in all groups of hypoactive, hyperactive, and mixed subtypes (BR: 4.59, CI 2.01–10.48; BR: 4.59, CI 1.76–31.66; BR: 3.36, CI 1.73–6.52; all P < 0.05). Significance of results The mixed subtype was more persistent to management than the hypoactive and hyperactive subtypes. Delirium management remains controversial and, generally, supportive care benefited patients most. Psychopharmacological management for delirium requires careful choosing of and limiting the number of psychotropics.","PeriodicalId":19953,"journal":{"name":"Palliative and Supportive Care","volume":"15 1","pages":"4 - 11"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical management of delirium: The response depends on the subtypes. An observational cohort study in 602 patients\",\"authors\":\"C. Zipser, S. Knoepfel, P. Hayoz, M. Schubert, J. Ernst, R. von Känel, Soenke Boettger\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S1478951519000609\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Objective The hypoactive, hyperactive, and mixed subtypes of delirium differently impact patient management and prognosis, yet the evidence remains sparse. Therefore, we examined the outcome of varying management strategies in the subtypes of delirium. Methods In this observational cohort study, 602 patients were managed for delirium over 20 days with the following strategies: supportive care alone or in combination with psychotropics, single, dual, or triple+ psychotropic regimens. Cox regression models were calculated for time to remission and benefit rates (BRs) of management strategies. Results Generally, the mixed subtype of delirium caused more severe and persistent delirium, and the hypoactive subtype was more persistent than the hyperactive subtype. The subtypes of delirium were similarly predictive for mortality (P = 0.697) and transfer to inpatient psychiatric care (P = 0.320). In the mixed subtype, overall, psychotropic drugs were administered more often (P = 0.016), and particularly triple+ regimens were administered more commonly compared to hypoactive delirium (P = 0.007). Patients on supportive care benefited most, whereas those on triple+ regimens did worst in terms of remission in all groups of hypoactive, hyperactive, and mixed subtypes (BR: 4.59, CI 2.01–10.48; BR: 4.59, CI 1.76–31.66; BR: 3.36, CI 1.73–6.52; all P < 0.05). Significance of results The mixed subtype was more persistent to management than the hypoactive and hyperactive subtypes. Delirium management remains controversial and, generally, supportive care benefited patients most. Psychopharmacological management for delirium requires careful choosing of and limiting the number of psychotropics.\",\"PeriodicalId\":19953,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Palliative and Supportive Care\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"4 - 11\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Palliative and Supportive Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1478951519000609\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Palliative and Supportive Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1478951519000609","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

【摘要】目的谵妄的低活动性、多活动性和混合性亚型对患者管理和预后的影响不同,但相关证据尚少。因此,我们检查了谵妄亚型中不同管理策略的结果。方法在这项观察性队列研究中,602例谵妄患者接受以下治疗策略:单独或联合精神药物、单、双或三联治疗方案。采用Cox回归模型计算管理策略的缓解时间和获益率。结果一般情况下,混合型谵妄引起的谵妄更严重、更持久,且低活性型谵妄比多活性型谵妄更持久。谵妄的亚型同样可以预测死亡率(P = 0.697)和转入住院精神科治疗(P = 0.320)。在混合亚型中,总体而言,精神药物的使用频率更高(P = 0.016),特别是与低活动性谵妄相比,三重+方案的使用频率更高(P = 0.007)。支持治疗的患者获益最多,而在所有低活跃、多活跃和混合亚型组中,三+方案患者的缓解效果最差(BR: 4.59, CI 2.01-10.48;Br: 4.59, ci 1.76-31.66;Br: 3.36, ci 1.73-6.52;P < 0.05)。结果混合型比低动型和多动型更能坚持治疗。谵妄的管理仍有争议,一般来说,支持治疗对患者最有利。谵妄的精神药理学治疗需要谨慎选择和限制精神药物的数量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Clinical management of delirium: The response depends on the subtypes. An observational cohort study in 602 patients
Abstract Objective The hypoactive, hyperactive, and mixed subtypes of delirium differently impact patient management and prognosis, yet the evidence remains sparse. Therefore, we examined the outcome of varying management strategies in the subtypes of delirium. Methods In this observational cohort study, 602 patients were managed for delirium over 20 days with the following strategies: supportive care alone or in combination with psychotropics, single, dual, or triple+ psychotropic regimens. Cox regression models were calculated for time to remission and benefit rates (BRs) of management strategies. Results Generally, the mixed subtype of delirium caused more severe and persistent delirium, and the hypoactive subtype was more persistent than the hyperactive subtype. The subtypes of delirium were similarly predictive for mortality (P = 0.697) and transfer to inpatient psychiatric care (P = 0.320). In the mixed subtype, overall, psychotropic drugs were administered more often (P = 0.016), and particularly triple+ regimens were administered more commonly compared to hypoactive delirium (P = 0.007). Patients on supportive care benefited most, whereas those on triple+ regimens did worst in terms of remission in all groups of hypoactive, hyperactive, and mixed subtypes (BR: 4.59, CI 2.01–10.48; BR: 4.59, CI 1.76–31.66; BR: 3.36, CI 1.73–6.52; all P < 0.05). Significance of results The mixed subtype was more persistent to management than the hypoactive and hyperactive subtypes. Delirium management remains controversial and, generally, supportive care benefited patients most. Psychopharmacological management for delirium requires careful choosing of and limiting the number of psychotropics.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Examining public stigma and expectations of grief following medical aid and dying in the US: A vignette-based experiment. Bedbound. Shores of acceptance Light of the setting sun PAX volume 20 issue 6 Cover and Front matter
×
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