Cochrane · systematic review · CD009537

Interventions for preventing delirium in older people in institutional long‐term care

Woodhouse, R, Burton, JK, Rana, N, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2019 · Cochrane Library

Dementia and Cognitive Improvement2 versionsAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
21
current version
GRADE rated
9
No studies
12
Included studies
NR
No studies 12 · 57.1%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 3 · 14.3%Low 1 · 4.8%Moderate 5 · 23.8%High 0 · 0%

Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.

Questions and results

Show all 2 versions

Single‐component hydration intervention versus control for preventing delirium in older people in institutional long‐term care

Population: people at risk of delirium in institutional long‐term care
7 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Prevalence of delirium Not measured
Single‐component hydration intervention vs control
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Incidence of delirium NEECHAM Confusion Scale
Single‐component hydration intervention vs control
RR 0.85 [0.18, 4]1 study · 98 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Severity of delirium
Single‐component hydration intervention vs control
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Mortality
Single‐component hydration intervention vs control
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Cognitive function
Single‐component hydration intervention vs control
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Falls
Single‐component hydration intervention vs control
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Hospital admissions
Single‐component hydration intervention vs control
no estimate extractedNRNo studies

Multicomponent educational intervention compared to control for preventing delirium in older people in institutional long‐term care

Population: preventing delirium in older people in institutional long‐term care
7 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Prevalence of delirium
Multicomponent educational intervention vs control
RR 0.57 [0.15, 2.19]1 study · 160 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Incidence of delirium
Multicomponent educational intervention vs control
RR 0.62 [0.16, 2.39]1 study · 137 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Severity of delirium
Multicomponent educational intervention vs control
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Mortality
Multicomponent educational intervention vs control
RR 0.82 [0.5, 1.34]1 study · 215 participantsModerate
Downgraded: imprecision
Cognitive function
Multicomponent educational intervention vs control
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Falls
Multicomponent educational intervention vs control
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Hospital admissions
Multicomponent educational intervention vs control
RR 0.67 [0.57, 0.79]1 study · 494 participantsModerate
Downgraded: indirectness

Single‐component medication monitoring and adjustment intervention versus control for preventing delirium in older people in institutional long‐term care

Population: people at risk of delirium in institutional long‐term care
7 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Prevalence of delirium
Single‐component medication monitoring and adjustment intervention vs control
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Incidence of delirium NH‐CAM
Single‐component medication monitoring and adjustment intervention vs control
HR 0.42 [0.34, 0.51]1 study · 7311 participantsModerate
Downgraded: risk of bias
Severity of delirium
Single‐component medication monitoring and adjustment intervention vs control
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Mortality
Single‐component medication monitoring and adjustment intervention vs control
HR 0.88 [0.66, 1.17]1 study · 9412 participantsModerate
Downgraded: imprecision
Cognitive function
Single‐component medication monitoring and adjustment intervention vs control
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Falls Fall events
Single‐component medication monitoring and adjustment intervention vs control
RR 1.03 [0.92, 1.15]1 study · 2275 participantsLow
Downgraded: risk of bias
Hospital admissions
Single‐component medication monitoring and adjustment intervention vs control
HR 0.89 [0.72, 1.1]1 study · 7599 participantsModerate
Downgraded: imprecision