Table 1.
Author (reference) | Design (N) | Sample size calculation | Delirium definition | Screening tool | Screen frequency (no./day) | ICU patient population | Delirium incidence or severity with NL exposure |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Our study | Retrospective analysis of prospective study (181) | Yesa | DSM-IV-TR | CAM-ICU | 3 | Long stay medical and surgical with ARDS | Decreased |
Arenson [6] | Retrospective (1010) | No | Not reported | CAM-ICU | 3 | Post-operative | No change |
Estrup [5] | Retrospective (183) | No | Not reported | CAM-ICUb | 2 | Unspecified | No change |
Kohn [7] | Retrospective (6631) | No | Not reported | Nonec | 1 | Medical ICU patients | No change |
Smonig [1] | Prospective, observational (195) | Yesa | Not reported | ICDSCc | 2 | On MV of any etiology/duration | No changed |
Zaal [8] | Prospective, before–after (130) | No | Not reported | CAM-ICU | 1 | Medical and surgical | No change |
ARDS acute respiratory distress syndrome, CAM-ICU confusion assessment method for the ICU, DSM Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, ICDSC Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist, MV mechanical ventilation
aTo achieve a power of power 80% to detect a decrease of delirium from 80 to 60% (two-sided test, alpha = 0.05), the necessary sample size is 180 patients [1] would be necessary
bDelirium categorization included any patient treated with haloperidol, regardless of CAM-ICU screen
cRequired a positive screen for at least 2 consecutive days to be considered positive
dLess haloperidol administration; less hallucinations