Home › Research › Clinical safety
Postoperative delirium
Oh ST, Park JY.. Korean journal of anesthesiology, 2018-08-24
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Delirium can be defined as an 'acute brain dysfunction.' Compared to dementia, which is a disease that deteriorates the brain function chronically, delirium shows very similar symptoms but is mostly ameliorated when the causative factors are normalized. Due to the heterogeneity in etiologies and symptoms, people including health care workers often mistake delirium for dementia or other psychiatric disorders. Delirium has attracted global interest increasingly and a vast amount of research on its management has been conducted. Experts in the field have constantly suggested that systematic intervention should be implemented through a team-based multicomponent approach aimed to reduce the incidence and duration of delirium. Surgery involves many health care workers with different expertise who are not familiar with delirium. For a team-based approach on the management of delirium, it is vital that all medical personnel concerned have a common understanding of delirium and keep in constant communication. Postoperative delirium is a common complication and exerts an enormous burden on patients, their families, hospitals, and public resources. To alleviate this burden, this article aimed to review general features and the latest evidence-based knowledge of delirium with a focus on postoperative delirium.
Key findings
- Delirium can be defined as an 'acute brain dysfunction.' Compared to dementia, which is a disease that deteriorates the brain function chronically, delirium shows very similar symptoms but is mostly ameliorated when the causative factors are normalized.
- Experts in the field have constantly suggested that systematic intervention should be implemented through a team-based multicomponent approach aimed to reduce the incidence and duration of delirium.
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 41/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 24 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 41 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Korean journal of anesthesiology) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| 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 | 2 / 5 | 2019 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 30139213) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 24 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 24 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 41 out of 100. |
| Total | 41 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
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.
APA 7th
Oh, S. T., & Park, J. Y. (2019). Postoperative delirium. Korean journal of anesthesiology. https://doi.org/10.4097/kja.d.18.00073.1
Vancouver
Oh ST, Park JY. Postoperative delirium. Korean journal of anesthesiology. 2019. doi:10.4097/kja.d.18.00073.1. PMID: 30139213.
BibTeX
@article{oh2019-30139213,
author = {Oh, S. T. and Park, J. Y.},
title = {{Postoperative delirium}},
journal = {Korean journal of anesthesiology},
year = {2019},
doi = {10.4097/kja.d.18.00073.1},
pmid = {30139213},
url = {https://doi.org/10.4097/kja.d.18.00073.1}
}