Advance Directives, Hospitalization, and Survival Among Advanced Cancer Patients with Delirium Presenting to the Emergency Department: A Prospective Study

Author:

Elsayem Ahmed F.1,Bruera Eduardo2,Valentine Alan3,Warneke Carla L.4,Wood Geri L.5,Yeung Sai-Ching J.1,Page Valda D.1,Silvestre Julio1,Brock Patricia A.1,Todd Knox H.1

Affiliation:

1. Department of Emergency Medicine, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston School of Nursing, Houston, Texas, USA

2. Departments of Palliative, Rehabilitation, and Integrative Medicine, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston School of Nursing, Houston, Texas, USA

3. Department of Psychiatry, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston School of Nursing, Houston, Texas, USA

4. Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA

5. The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston School of Nursing, Houston, Texas, USA

Abstract

Abstract Background To improve the management of advanced cancer patients with delirium in an emergency department (ED) setting, we compared outcomes between patients with delirium positively diagnosed by both the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) and Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale (MDAS), or group A (n = 22); by the MDAS only, or group B (n = 22); and by neither CAM nor MDAS, or group C (n = 199). Materials and Methods In an oncologic ED, we assessed 243 randomly selected advanced cancer patients for delirium using the CAM and the MDAS and for presence of advance directives. Outcomes extracted from patients’ medical records included hospital and intensive care unit admission rate and overall survival (OS). Results Hospitalization rates were 82%, 77%, and 49% for groups A, B, and C, respectively (p = .0013). Intensive care unit rates were 18%, 14%, and 2% for groups A, B, and C, respectively (p = .0004). Percentages with advance directives were 52%, 27%, and 43% for groups A, B, and C, respectively (p = .2247). Median OS was 1.23 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.46–3.55) for group A, 4.70 months (95% CI 0.89–7.85) for group B, and 10.45 months (95% CI 7.46–14.82) for group C. Overall survival did not differ significantly between groups A and B (p = .6392), but OS in group C exceeded those of the other groups (p < .0001 each). Conclusion Delirium assessed by either CAM or MDAS was associated with worse survival and more hospitalization in patients with advanced cancer in an oncologic ED. Many advanced cancer patients with delirium in ED lack advance directives. Delirium should be assessed regularly and should trigger discussion of goals of care and advance directives.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Cancer Research,Oncology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3