Back

Delirium in a Young Predominantly Hispanic Population with COVID-19

Talkington, K. C.; Alvarado, L. A.; Castaneda, C. A.; Tonarelli, S. B.

2023-01-23 psychiatry and clinical psychology
10.1101/2023.01.22.23284879 medRxiv
Show abstract

PurposeTo study a primarily Hispanic population of adults younger than 65 to determine if COVID-19 patients with a concurrent delirium diagnosis had worse clinical outcomes in terms of hospital stay, ventilation and mortality, than those without a delirium diagnosis. MethodsAfter approval by the appropriate Institutional Review Board, a retrospective cohort study was performed looking at demographics, vital statistics, and clinical outcomes of patients aged 18-65 admitted to a hospital in the United States - Mexico border region with COVID-19 between March 1 and June 30, 2020. Data were analyzed using Fishers exact test, or an unpaired t-test where appropriate, and a univariate analysis was performed to establish relative risk. Confidence intervals were set at 95% and p values [≤]0.05 were considered significant. Results133 patients with confirmed COVID-19 diagnoses (58% men, 92% Hispanic) were included. Mean age was 50.5 with a standard deviation of 11.7 years (range 20-65 years). The prevalence of delirium was 6%. Fifty percent of delirium patients died during hospitalization compared to 15% of patients without delirium. Patients with delirium were found to spend more days hospitalized, in the intensive care unit, and intubated than their counterparts without delirium. Delirium was associated with increased risk of being placed on mechanical ventilation (RR 3.91, 95% CI 1.46--10.41, p value 0.006). ConclusionsDelirium was associated with worse COVID-19 outcomes independent of age. COVID-19 patients need to be actively assessed for signs of delirium and appropriate precautionary measures should be implemented. Proper documentation of delirium is key to continue learning about the incidence of delirium in COVID-19 patients.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.