John W Devlin, Frederick Sieber, Oluwaseun Akeju, Babar A Khan, Alasdair M J MacLullich, Edward R Marcantonio, Esther S Oh, Meera R Agar, Thiago J Avelino-Silva, Miles Berger, Lisa Burry, Elizabeth A Colantuoni, Lis A Evered, Timothy D Girard, Jin H Han, Annmarie Hosie, Christopher Hughes, Richard N Jones, Pratik P Pandharipande, Balachundhar Subramanian, Thomas G Travison, Mark van den Boogaard, Sharon K Inouye
{"title":"推进老年人谵妄治疗试验:谵妄调查网络对未来试验的建议:统一科学家(NIDUS)。","authors":"John W Devlin, Frederick Sieber, Oluwaseun Akeju, Babar A Khan, Alasdair M J MacLullich, Edward R Marcantonio, Esther S Oh, Meera R Agar, Thiago J Avelino-Silva, Miles Berger, Lisa Burry, Elizabeth A Colantuoni, Lis A Evered, Timothy D Girard, Jin H Han, Annmarie Hosie, Christopher Hughes, Richard N Jones, Pratik P Pandharipande, Balachundhar Subramanian, Thomas G Travison, Mark van den Boogaard, Sharon K Inouye","doi":"10.1097/CCM.0000000000006514","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To summarize the delirium treatment trial literature, identify the unique challenges in delirium treatment trials, and formulate recommendations to address each in older adults.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A 39-member interprofessional and international expert working group of clinicians (physicians, nurses, and pharmacists) and nonclinicians (biostatisticians, epidemiologists, and trial methodologists) was convened. Four expert panels were assembled to explore key subtopics (pharmacological/nonpharmacologic treatment, methodological challenges, and novel research designs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>To provide background and context, a review of delirium treatment randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between 2003 and 2023 was conducted and evidence gaps were identified. The four panels addressed the identified subtopics. For each subtopic, research challenges were identified and recommendations to address each were proposed through virtual discussion before a live, full-day, and in-person conference. General agreement was reached for each proposed recommendation across the entire working group via moderated conference discussion. Recommendations were synthesized across panels and iteratively discussed through rounds of virtual meetings and draft reviews.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified key evidence gaps through a systematic literature review, yielding 43 RCTs of delirium treatments. From this review, eight unique challenges for delirium treatment trials were identified, and recommendations to address each were made based on panel input. The recommendations start with design of interventions that consider the multifactorial nature of delirium, include both pharmacological and nonpharmacologic approaches, and target pathophysiologic pathways where possible. Selecting appropriate at-risk patients with moderate vulnerability to delirium may maximize effectiveness. Targeting patients with at least moderate delirium severity and duration will include those most likely to experience adverse outcomes. Delirium severity should be the primary outcome of choice; measurement of short- and long-term clinical outcomes will maximize clinical relevance. Finally, plans for handling informative censoring and missing data are key.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>By addressing key delirium treatment challenges and research gaps, our recommendations may serve as a roadmap for advancing delirium treatment research in older adults.</p>","PeriodicalId":10765,"journal":{"name":"Critical Care Medicine","volume":"53 1","pages":"e15-e28"},"PeriodicalIF":7.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Advancing Delirium Treatment Trials in Older Adults: Recommendations for Future Trials From the Network for Investigation of Delirium: Unifying Scientists (NIDUS).\",\"authors\":\"John W Devlin, Frederick Sieber, Oluwaseun Akeju, Babar A Khan, Alasdair M J MacLullich, Edward R Marcantonio, Esther S Oh, Meera R Agar, Thiago J Avelino-Silva, Miles Berger, Lisa Burry, Elizabeth A Colantuoni, Lis A Evered, Timothy D Girard, Jin H Han, Annmarie Hosie, Christopher Hughes, Richard N Jones, Pratik P Pandharipande, Balachundhar Subramanian, Thomas G Travison, Mark van den Boogaard, Sharon K Inouye\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/CCM.0000000000006514\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To summarize the delirium treatment trial literature, identify the unique challenges in delirium treatment trials, and formulate recommendations to address each in older adults.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A 39-member interprofessional and international expert working group of clinicians (physicians, nurses, and pharmacists) and nonclinicians (biostatisticians, epidemiologists, and trial methodologists) was convened. Four expert panels were assembled to explore key subtopics (pharmacological/nonpharmacologic treatment, methodological challenges, and novel research designs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>To provide background and context, a review of delirium treatment randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between 2003 and 2023 was conducted and evidence gaps were identified. The four panels addressed the identified subtopics. For each subtopic, research challenges were identified and recommendations to address each were proposed through virtual discussion before a live, full-day, and in-person conference. General agreement was reached for each proposed recommendation across the entire working group via moderated conference discussion. Recommendations were synthesized across panels and iteratively discussed through rounds of virtual meetings and draft reviews.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified key evidence gaps through a systematic literature review, yielding 43 RCTs of delirium treatments. From this review, eight unique challenges for delirium treatment trials were identified, and recommendations to address each were made based on panel input. The recommendations start with design of interventions that consider the multifactorial nature of delirium, include both pharmacological and nonpharmacologic approaches, and target pathophysiologic pathways where possible. Selecting appropriate at-risk patients with moderate vulnerability to delirium may maximize effectiveness. Targeting patients with at least moderate delirium severity and duration will include those most likely to experience adverse outcomes. Delirium severity should be the primary outcome of choice; measurement of short- and long-term clinical outcomes will maximize clinical relevance. Finally, plans for handling informative censoring and missing data are key.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>By addressing key delirium treatment challenges and research gaps, our recommendations may serve as a roadmap for advancing delirium treatment research in older adults.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10765,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical Care Medicine\",\"volume\":\"53 1\",\"pages\":\"e15-e28\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical Care Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000006514\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/11/22 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Care Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000006514","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Advancing Delirium Treatment Trials in Older Adults: Recommendations for Future Trials From the Network for Investigation of Delirium: Unifying Scientists (NIDUS).
Objectives: To summarize the delirium treatment trial literature, identify the unique challenges in delirium treatment trials, and formulate recommendations to address each in older adults.
Design: A 39-member interprofessional and international expert working group of clinicians (physicians, nurses, and pharmacists) and nonclinicians (biostatisticians, epidemiologists, and trial methodologists) was convened. Four expert panels were assembled to explore key subtopics (pharmacological/nonpharmacologic treatment, methodological challenges, and novel research designs).
Methods: To provide background and context, a review of delirium treatment randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between 2003 and 2023 was conducted and evidence gaps were identified. The four panels addressed the identified subtopics. For each subtopic, research challenges were identified and recommendations to address each were proposed through virtual discussion before a live, full-day, and in-person conference. General agreement was reached for each proposed recommendation across the entire working group via moderated conference discussion. Recommendations were synthesized across panels and iteratively discussed through rounds of virtual meetings and draft reviews.
Results: We identified key evidence gaps through a systematic literature review, yielding 43 RCTs of delirium treatments. From this review, eight unique challenges for delirium treatment trials were identified, and recommendations to address each were made based on panel input. The recommendations start with design of interventions that consider the multifactorial nature of delirium, include both pharmacological and nonpharmacologic approaches, and target pathophysiologic pathways where possible. Selecting appropriate at-risk patients with moderate vulnerability to delirium may maximize effectiveness. Targeting patients with at least moderate delirium severity and duration will include those most likely to experience adverse outcomes. Delirium severity should be the primary outcome of choice; measurement of short- and long-term clinical outcomes will maximize clinical relevance. Finally, plans for handling informative censoring and missing data are key.
Conclusions: By addressing key delirium treatment challenges and research gaps, our recommendations may serve as a roadmap for advancing delirium treatment research in older adults.
期刊介绍:
Critical Care Medicine is the premier peer-reviewed, scientific publication in critical care medicine. Directed to those specialists who treat patients in the ICU and CCU, including chest physicians, surgeons, pediatricians, pharmacists/pharmacologists, anesthesiologists, critical care nurses, and other healthcare professionals, Critical Care Medicine covers all aspects of acute and emergency care for the critically ill or injured patient.
Each issue presents critical care practitioners with clinical breakthroughs that lead to better patient care, the latest news on promising research, and advances in equipment and techniques.