Back

Derivation and validation of a prediction rule for sedative-associated delirium during acute respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation

Prendergast, N. T.; Onyemekwu, C. A.; Potter, K. M.; Franz, C. A.; Kitsios, G. D.; McVerry, B. J.; Pandharipande, P. P.; Ely, E. W.; Girard, T. D.

2024-10-01 intensive care and critical care medicine
10.1101/2024.09.30.24314628 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundDelirium during acute respiratory failure is common and morbid. Pharmacologic sedation is a major risk factor for delirium, but some sedation is often necessary for the provision of safe care of mechanically ventilated patients. A simple, transparent model that predicts sedative-associated delirium in mechanically ventilated ICU patients could be used to guide decisions about personalized sedation. Research QuestionCan the risk of sedative-associated delirium be estimated in mechanically-ventilated ICU patients? Study Design and MethodsUsing the subset of patients in a previously-published ICU cohort who received mechanical ventilation, we performed backward stepwise logistic regression to derive a model predictive of sedative-associated delirium. We validated this model internally using hundredfold bootstrapping. We then validated this model externally in a separate prospective cohort of mechanically ventilated ICU patients. Results836 patients comprised the derivation cohort. Backwards stepwise regression produced a model with age, BMI, sepsis, SOFA, malignancy, COPD, stroke, sex, and doses of sedatives (opioids, propofol, and/or benzodiazepines) as predictors of sedative-associated delirium. The model had very good discriminative power, with an area under the receiver-operator curve (AUROC) of 0.83. Internal validation via bootstrapping showed preserved discriminatory function with an AUROC of 0.81 and graphical evidence of good calibration. External validation in a separate set of 340 patients showed good discrimination, with AUROC of 0.70. InterpretationSedative-associated delirium during acute respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation can be predicted using a simple, transparent model, which can now be validated in a prospective study.

Matching journals

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

1
Critical Care Explorations
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
29.2%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 16%
11.0%
3
British Journal of Anaesthesia
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.7%
4
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 4%
5.1%
50% of probability mass above
5
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 29%
4.2%
6
Critical Care
14 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.6%
7
Journal of General Internal Medicine
20 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.2%
8
European Respiratory Journal
54 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.9%
9
JAMIA Open
37 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.8%
10
Bioinformatics
1061 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.8%
11
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.8%
12
Physiological Measurement
12 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.8%
13
EClinicalMedicine
21 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.8%
14
Neurocritical Care
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.8%
15
Frontiers in Physiology
93 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.8%
16
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.8%
17
JMIR Medical Informatics
17 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
18
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
12 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.9%
19
Trials
25 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
20
BMJ
49 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.9%
21
eBioMedicine
130 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
22
Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.9%
23
Frontiers in Neurology
91 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
24
Journal of Neurology
26 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
25
JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
45 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
26
Clinical Chemistry
22 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.7%
27
Biology Methods and Protocols
53 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
28
Journal of Infection
71 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
29
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.5%
30
F1000Research
79 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.5%