Jun Kawabata, Kotaro Kuwaki, Tohru Takaseya, Naoki Itaya, Shinichi Tanihara
{"title":"比较2019冠状病毒病家庭探视限制前后心血管手术中谵妄发生率和住院时间:一项单中心队列研究","authors":"Jun Kawabata, Kotaro Kuwaki, Tohru Takaseya, Naoki Itaya, Shinichi Tanihara","doi":"10.2739/kurumemedj.MS7134009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The impact of visitation restrictions due to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic remains uncertain. This study examined delirium incidence and length of hospital stay of patients who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting, percutaneous coronary intervention, and transcatheter aortic valve implantation before and after visitation restrictions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The visitation restriction group (RG) included patients admitted and discharged between April 1, 2020, and March 31, 2022, whereas the non-restriction group (Non-RG) included those between April 1, 2018, and March 31, 2020. A chi-square test and sensitivity analysis were conducted to compare delirium incidence. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare the median length of stay. We conducted a multivariate logistic regression analysis to examine the association between delirium incidence and visitation restrictions and performed a subgroup analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no significant difference in delirium incidence between Non-RG and RG (0.7% vs. 2.1%, P=0.083), as supported by the sensitivity analysis (3.3% vs. 2.1%, P=0.29). The length of stay significantly differed between Non-RG and RG (14 vs. 16 days, P=0.021). The odds ratios for delirium incidence, visitation restriction, emergency admission, and daily living level II were 2.46 (1.11-5.84), 3.65 (1.65-8.31), and 18.2 (3.45- 78.8), respectively. In the subgroup analysis, increase in sleep medications and discharge support were observed in high-risk patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The analyses revealed no significant differences in delirium incidence between Non-RG and RG; however, the length of stay slightly increased. Delirium support and strategies for patient well-being during a pandemic are warranted.</p>","PeriodicalId":39559,"journal":{"name":"Kurume Medical Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing Delirium Incidence and Length of Stay in Cardiovascular Procedures Before and After Coronavirus Disease 2019 Family Visitation Restrictions: A Single-Center Cohort Study.\",\"authors\":\"Jun Kawabata, Kotaro Kuwaki, Tohru Takaseya, Naoki Itaya, Shinichi Tanihara\",\"doi\":\"10.2739/kurumemedj.MS7134009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The impact of visitation restrictions due to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic remains uncertain. This study examined delirium incidence and length of hospital stay of patients who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting, percutaneous coronary intervention, and transcatheter aortic valve implantation before and after visitation restrictions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The visitation restriction group (RG) included patients admitted and discharged between April 1, 2020, and March 31, 2022, whereas the non-restriction group (Non-RG) included those between April 1, 2018, and March 31, 2020. A chi-square test and sensitivity analysis were conducted to compare delirium incidence. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare the median length of stay. We conducted a multivariate logistic regression analysis to examine the association between delirium incidence and visitation restrictions and performed a subgroup analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no significant difference in delirium incidence between Non-RG and RG (0.7% vs. 2.1%, P=0.083), as supported by the sensitivity analysis (3.3% vs. 2.1%, P=0.29). The length of stay significantly differed between Non-RG and RG (14 vs. 16 days, P=0.021). The odds ratios for delirium incidence, visitation restriction, emergency admission, and daily living level II were 2.46 (1.11-5.84), 3.65 (1.65-8.31), and 18.2 (3.45- 78.8), respectively. In the subgroup analysis, increase in sleep medications and discharge support were observed in high-risk patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The analyses revealed no significant differences in delirium incidence between Non-RG and RG; however, the length of stay slightly increased. Delirium support and strategies for patient well-being during a pandemic are warranted.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":39559,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Kurume Medical Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Kurume Medical Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2739/kurumemedj.MS7134009\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kurume Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2739/kurumemedj.MS7134009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:新型冠状病毒病(COVID-19)大流行导致的探视限制的影响仍不确定。本研究对行冠状动脉旁路移植术、经皮冠状动脉介入治疗和经导管主动脉瓣植入术患者在限制探视前后谵妄的发生率和住院时间进行了研究。方法:限制探视组(RG)包括2020年4月1日至2022年3月31日期间入院和出院的患者,非限制探视组(Non-RG)包括2018年4月1日至2020年3月31日期间入院和出院的患者。采用卡方检验和敏感性分析比较谵妄发生率。使用Mann-Whitney U检验比较中位住院时间。我们进行了多变量logistic回归分析,以检验谵妄发生率与探视限制之间的关系,并进行了亚组分析。结果:非RG组与RG组谵妄发生率无显著性差异(0.7% vs. 2.1%, P=0.083),敏感性分析支持这一结果(3.3% vs. 2.1%, P=0.29)。非RG组和RG组的住院时间差异显著(14天vs. 16天,P=0.021)。谵妄发生率、探视限制、急诊入院和日常生活水平II的比值比分别为2.46(1.11 ~ 5.84)、3.65(1.65 ~ 8.31)和18.2(3.45 ~ 78.8)。在亚组分析中,观察到高危患者睡眠药物和出院支持的增加。结论:非RG组与RG组谵妄发生率无显著性差异;然而,停留时间略有增加。在大流行期间,谵妄支持和患者福祉战略是必要的。
Comparing Delirium Incidence and Length of Stay in Cardiovascular Procedures Before and After Coronavirus Disease 2019 Family Visitation Restrictions: A Single-Center Cohort Study.
Background: The impact of visitation restrictions due to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic remains uncertain. This study examined delirium incidence and length of hospital stay of patients who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting, percutaneous coronary intervention, and transcatheter aortic valve implantation before and after visitation restrictions.
Methods: The visitation restriction group (RG) included patients admitted and discharged between April 1, 2020, and March 31, 2022, whereas the non-restriction group (Non-RG) included those between April 1, 2018, and March 31, 2020. A chi-square test and sensitivity analysis were conducted to compare delirium incidence. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare the median length of stay. We conducted a multivariate logistic regression analysis to examine the association between delirium incidence and visitation restrictions and performed a subgroup analysis.
Results: There was no significant difference in delirium incidence between Non-RG and RG (0.7% vs. 2.1%, P=0.083), as supported by the sensitivity analysis (3.3% vs. 2.1%, P=0.29). The length of stay significantly differed between Non-RG and RG (14 vs. 16 days, P=0.021). The odds ratios for delirium incidence, visitation restriction, emergency admission, and daily living level II were 2.46 (1.11-5.84), 3.65 (1.65-8.31), and 18.2 (3.45- 78.8), respectively. In the subgroup analysis, increase in sleep medications and discharge support were observed in high-risk patients.
Conclusion: The analyses revealed no significant differences in delirium incidence between Non-RG and RG; however, the length of stay slightly increased. Delirium support and strategies for patient well-being during a pandemic are warranted.