Key result
Implementation of a bedside delirium prevention sign on an orthopaedic unit did not significantly reduce delirium prevalence compared to baseline (11.4% vs 8.0%; P=0.31).
Why the study?
Multicomponent non-pharmacological interventions reduce delirium but are challenging to implement in routine care, revealing a delivery gap on an orthopaedic unit.
Does a bedside delirium prevention sign reduce delirium prevalence in older orthopaedic inpatients?
Does a bedside delirium prevention sign reduce delirium prevalence in older orthopaedic inpatients?
Absolute Event Rate: 11.4% vs 8%
p-value: p=0.31
Implementation of a bedside delirium prevention sign improved staff compliance with non-pharmacological interventions but did not significantly reduce delirium prevalence in orthopaedic inpatients.
Delirium is a serious and common condition that leads to significant adverse health outcomes for hospitalised older adults. It occurs in 30%-55% of patients with hip fractures and is one of the most common postoperative complications in older adults undergoing orthopaedic surgery. Multicomponent, non-pharmacological interventions can reduce delirium incidence by up to 30% but are often challenging to implement as part of routine care. We identified a gap in the delivery of non-pharmacological interventions on an orthopaedic unit. This project aimed to implement a bedside sign on an orthopaedic unit to reduce the occurrence of delirium by prompting staff to use multicomponent evidence-based delirium prevention strategies for at-risk older adults. Quality improvement methods were used to integrate and optimise the use of a bedside 'delirium prevention' sign on an orthopaedic unit.The sign was implemented in four target rooms and sign completion rates increased from 47% to 83% (95% CI 71.7% to 94.9%; p<0.001) over a 10-month period. The sign did not have a significant impact on delirium prevalence. The mean Confusion Assessment Method (CAM)+ rate during the baseline period was 8% with an absolute increase in the intervention period to 11.4% (95% CI 7.2% to 15.8%; p=0.31). There were no significant shifts or trends in the run chart for the proportion of patients with CAM+ scores over time. The sign was well received by staff, who reported it was a worthwhile use of time and prompted use of non-pharmacological interventions. This quality improvement project successfully integrated a novel, low-cost, feasible and evidence-based approach into routine clinical care to support staff to deliver non-pharmacological interventions. Given the increased pressures on front-line staff in hospital, tools that reduce cognitive load at the bedside are important to consider when caring for a vulnerable older adult patient population.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Reppas‐Rindlisbacher et al. (2021) studied Delirium in orthopaedic inpatients. Bedside delirium prevention sign vs. Baseline period (routine care without the sign) was evaluated on Delirium prevalence (CAM+ rate) (p=0.31). Implementation of a bedside delirium prevention sign on an orthopaedic unit did not significantly reduce delirium prevalence compared to baseline (11.4% vs 8.0%; P=0.31).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: