Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 42 out of 100. Clinical safety

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

POD occurred in 43 patients (4.1%). Affected patients were older, in poorer preoperative health, and had longer anaesthesia and surgery times. Univariate analysis showed associations between POD and age, American society of Anesthesiologists-Physical Status (ASA-PS), dementia, surgery duration, and intraoperative tracheostomy. Multivariate analysis identified age, ASA-PS, surgical site, anaesthesia time, and tracheostomy as independent predictors. Prolonged anaesthesia was found to be a modifiable risk factor for POD. Identifying at-risk patients and minimising anaesthesia time may help reduce POD incidence. Persistent delirium beyond 72 hours postoperatively warrants further evaluation.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Kamata, K., & Hagihira, S. (2025). Incidence and perioperative risk factors for postoperative delirium in the intensive care unit among adult surgical patients – Retrospective cohort study. Indian Journal of Anaesthesia. https://doi.org/10.4103/ija.ija_377_25

Vancouver

Kamata K, Hagihira S. Incidence and perioperative risk factors for postoperative delirium in the intensive care unit among adult surgical patients – Retrospective cohort study. Indian Journal of Anaesthesia. 2025. doi:10.4103/ija.ija_377_25. PMID: 40880963.

BibTeX

@article{kamata2025-40880963,
  author  = {Kamata, Kotoe and Hagihira, Satoshi},
  title   = {{Incidence and perioperative risk factors for postoperative delirium in the intensive care unit among adult surgical patients – Retrospective cohort study}},
  journal = {Indian Journal of Anaesthesia},
  year    = {2025},
  doi     = {10.4103/ija.ija_377_25},
  pmid    = {40880963},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.4103/ija.ija_377_25}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

Key findings

Why it matters

This retrospective cohort found that postoperative delirium occurred in 4.1% of adult surgical patients and that prolonged anaesthesia was a modifiable risk factor, with dementia associated with delirium on univariate analysis. It is about preventing delirium after surgery, not about treating, curing or preventing Alzheimer's disease.

Study details

How this study scored 42/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record 0 of 4; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 4 of 5; Sample size 1 of 4; Effect reported 2 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited 1 of 7; Citations per year 1 of 5; Impact for its field and year 3 of 6; Cited by studies here 0 of 6; Still being cited 1 of 4; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record 1 of 3; Multi-centre collaboration 1 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 2 of 2. 40 of the 96 points it could be judged on, which is 42 of 100. Total 42 of 100.40 of the 96 points we could judge = 42 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on senior author's track record, so that was left out: it earned 40 of the 96 points we could judge it on, which is 42 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Indian Journal of Anaesthesia)
Journal's citation record 0 / 4 Indian Journal of Anaesthesia: journal h-index 72 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design 0 / 12 No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Strength of evidence 1 / 5 Rated “low” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 4 / 5 2025 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 1 / 4 43 participants
Effect reported 2 / 3 Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test
Studied in people 3 / 3 Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited 1 / 7 Cited 4 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year 1 / 5 1.3 citations a year over 3 year(s) since 2025
Impact for its field and year 3 / 6 Cited 3.1× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here 0 / 6 No other study in this library cites it
Still being cited 1 / 4 Cited 4 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record — / 4 Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record 1 / 3 Tohoku University: institution h-index 880 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration 1 / 3 OpenAlex lists 2 institution(s) in 1 country
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 40880963)
Free to read 2 / 2 Free to read
Points 40 / 96 Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 40 of the 96 points we could judge it on is 42 out of 100.
Total 42 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).

Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.

Related studies in Clinical safety

Also tagged “palliative”

858 studies in the library carry the topic tag “palliative”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 858 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Clinical safety

See all studies in Clinical safety →