Previous-day physical restraint duration as a bedside signal for following-day delirium: a retrospective patient-day analysis in a mixed ICU.

IF 7.5 2区 医学 Q1 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Aki Sasaki, Tomoki Kuribara, Takeshi Unoki, Junpei Haruna, Hiroomi Tatsumi
{"title":"Previous-day physical restraint duration as a bedside signal for following-day delirium: a retrospective patient-day analysis in a mixed ICU.","authors":"Aki Sasaki, Tomoki Kuribara, Takeshi Unoki, Junpei Haruna, Hiroomi Tatsumi","doi":"10.1186/s40560-026-00910-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Delirium is common in the intensive care unit and associated with adverse outcomes. However, bedside indicators that flag patients at high risk for delirium the following day are lacking. Although physical restraint has been linked to delirium, many prior studies relied on cross-sectional, same-day assessments that cannot exclude reverse causation. This study aimed to evaluate whether cumulative previous-day physical restraint duration was a bedside signal for following-day delirium.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a single-center retrospective observational cohort study using patient-days (00:00-24:00 h) as the unit of analysis, with the exposure and covariates derived from more granular, time-stamped nursing records aggregated into calendar-day units. The exposure was cumulative physical restraint duration on the previous day, reported per 8-h increase. The outcome was incident delirium on the following day, defined as an Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist (ICDSC) score ≥ 4. The primary analysis was restricted to patient-days without previous-day delirium (ICDSC 0-3). We fitted a generalized linear mixed model with a random intercept for each patient. The restraint duration was modeled using a natural cubic spline (degrees of freedom = 3).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 1,482 patient-days from 281 patients, 263 patient-days were excluded due to coma. The primary analysis included 729 patient-days from 247 patients without previous-day delirium (115 incident delirium events, 15.8%). The association between restraint duration and following-day incident delirium was non-linear (likelihood ratio test, P < 0.001). Using no restraint as the reference, the odds ratios were 2.43 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.64-3.61) at 8 h, 5.16 (95% CI 3.39-7.85) at 16 h, and 10.01 (95% CI 6.31-15.88) at 24 h. Sensitivity analyses using complete-case analysis, last observation carried forward, best-case/worst-case extreme scenarios, and adjustment for previous-day mental status yielded consistent results.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this single-center cohort, longer restraint duration on the previous day was associated with a higher risk of incident delirium the following day and may serve as a bedside-observable signal rather than evidence of a causal effect. Residual confounding may remain; prospective observational studies are needed to confirm this signal before its clinical utility is evaluated.</p>","PeriodicalId":16123,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Intensive Care","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13520223/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Intensive Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40560-026-00910-6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Delirium is common in the intensive care unit and associated with adverse outcomes. However, bedside indicators that flag patients at high risk for delirium the following day are lacking. Although physical restraint has been linked to delirium, many prior studies relied on cross-sectional, same-day assessments that cannot exclude reverse causation. This study aimed to evaluate whether cumulative previous-day physical restraint duration was a bedside signal for following-day delirium.

Methods: We conducted a single-center retrospective observational cohort study using patient-days (00:00-24:00 h) as the unit of analysis, with the exposure and covariates derived from more granular, time-stamped nursing records aggregated into calendar-day units. The exposure was cumulative physical restraint duration on the previous day, reported per 8-h increase. The outcome was incident delirium on the following day, defined as an Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist (ICDSC) score ≥ 4. The primary analysis was restricted to patient-days without previous-day delirium (ICDSC 0-3). We fitted a generalized linear mixed model with a random intercept for each patient. The restraint duration was modeled using a natural cubic spline (degrees of freedom = 3).

Results: Of 1,482 patient-days from 281 patients, 263 patient-days were excluded due to coma. The primary analysis included 729 patient-days from 247 patients without previous-day delirium (115 incident delirium events, 15.8%). The association between restraint duration and following-day incident delirium was non-linear (likelihood ratio test, P < 0.001). Using no restraint as the reference, the odds ratios were 2.43 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.64-3.61) at 8 h, 5.16 (95% CI 3.39-7.85) at 16 h, and 10.01 (95% CI 6.31-15.88) at 24 h. Sensitivity analyses using complete-case analysis, last observation carried forward, best-case/worst-case extreme scenarios, and adjustment for previous-day mental status yielded consistent results.

Conclusions: In this single-center cohort, longer restraint duration on the previous day was associated with a higher risk of incident delirium the following day and may serve as a bedside-observable signal rather than evidence of a causal effect. Residual confounding may remain; prospective observational studies are needed to confirm this signal before its clinical utility is evaluated.

前一天身体约束持续时间作为次日谵妄的床边信号:混合ICU患者日回顾性分析
背景:谵妄常见于重症监护病房,并与不良后果相关。然而,缺乏标记患者第二天谵妄高风险的床边指标。虽然身体约束与谵妄有关,但许多先前的研究依赖于横断面,当日评估,不能排除反向因果关系。本研究旨在评估前一天身体约束持续时间的累积是否为次日谵妄的床边信号。方法:我们进行了一项单中心回顾性观察队列研究,以患者日(00:00-24:00 h)为分析单位,暴露和协变量来自更细粒度的、有时间戳的护理记录,汇总为日历日单位。暴露量为前一天的累计物理约束时间,每增加8小时报告一次。结果为第二天发生谵妄,定义为重症监护谵妄筛查检查表(ICDSC)评分≥4分。初步分析仅限于无前一日谵妄的患者日(ICDSC 0-3)。我们为每个病人拟合了一个随机截距的广义线性混合模型。约束时间采用自然三次样条(自由度= 3)建模。结果:281例患者的1482患者日中,263患者日因昏迷被排除。主要分析包括247例无前一天谵妄的患者的729个患者日(115例谵妄事件,15.8%)。约束时间与第二天谵妄事件之间的关系是非线性的(似然比检验,P)。结论:在这个单中心队列中,前一天较长的约束时间与第二天谵妄事件的高风险相关,可能是床边观察到的信号,而不是因果关系的证据。残留的混淆可能仍然存在;在评估其临床应用之前,需要前瞻性观察研究来证实这一信号。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Intensive Care
Journal of Intensive Care Medicine-Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine
CiteScore
11.90
自引率
1.40%
发文量
51
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊介绍: "Journal of Intensive Care" is an open access journal dedicated to the comprehensive coverage of intensive care medicine, providing a platform for the latest research and clinical insights in this critical field. The journal covers a wide range of topics, including intensive and critical care, trauma and surgical intensive care, pediatric intensive care, acute and emergency medicine, perioperative medicine, resuscitation, infection control, and organ dysfunction. Recognizing the importance of cultural diversity in healthcare practices, "Journal of Intensive Care" also encourages submissions that explore and discuss the cultural aspects of intensive care, aiming to promote a more inclusive and culturally sensitive approach to patient care. By fostering a global exchange of knowledge and expertise, the journal contributes to the continuous improvement of intensive care practices worldwide.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书