Intensive care nurses’ experiences and perceptions of delirium and delirium care
Introduction
Delirium is a reversible manifestation of acute brain dysfunction, characterised by an abrupt onset and a fluctuating course of disturbed consciousness, attention, cognition and perception (American Psychiatric Association (APA), 2013). The syndrome affects up to 80% of intensive care patients and has been associated with increased mortality, higher intubation rates, extended intensive care and hospital admissions (Ely et al., 2001, Ely et al., 2004, Page et al., 2009), and an increased risk of dementia and institutionalisation (Witlox et al., 2010, Brummel et al., 2014). It therefore presents a significant economic challenge for healthcare providers (Milbrandt et al., 2004) and can be seen as a public health threat.
It is recommended that clinicians routinely screen patients for delirium using a validated tool, such as the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU), which gathers information from a structured observation and interview to formally measure the characteristics of delirium (Barr et al., 2013, Ely et al., 2001; National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE), 2010). CAM-ICU is an adaptation of the Confusion Assessment Method, which was originally developed to be used by clinicians without formal psychiatric training with elderly hospitalized patients (Inouye et al., 1990). CAM-ICU is specifically designed for nonverbal patients.
Critical care nurses, who have continuous contact with patients, are in the best position to monitor fluctuations in delirium symptoms, and ensure prompt recognition and introduction of appropriate treatment. The initial measures to address delirium include identification and correction of its organic causes such as hypoxia, pain or infection, as well as rationalisation of drug regimens to avoid poly-pharmacy. It is also a good practice to implement early non-pharmacological interventions, such as patient reorientation, early mobilisation and sleep promotion, as these address other factors that may precipitate delirium. Failure to resolve the symptoms with these strategies should lead to introduction of drug therapies, i.e. neuroleptics and atypical antipsychotics into patient treatment (Borthwick et al., 2006, Fong et al., 2009).
However, the syndrome remains under-recognised (Cadogan et al., 2009, Forsgren and Eriksson, 2010, Mac Sweeney et al., 2010). A routine compliance audit in the author’s local ICU indicated that a third of delirium assessments were not attempted (Zamoscik et al., 2014). These reduced efforts in detecting delirium were identified despite delirium screening being integrated into core ICU nurse training, mandatory critical care competencies and nursing documentation, and despite the local policy on delirium management and provision of informal bedside teaching to staff.
Section snippets
Background
ICU nurses report having a good understanding of the seriousness of delirium, but simultaneously assign low priority to screening for and dealing with the syndrome (Devlin et al., 2008, Price, 2004, Scott et al., 2013). Some nurses feel uncomfortable when delirium is diagnosed, and when faced with patients’ distrusting, irritable and sometimes violent behaviours (Jung et al., 2013). They experience emotional and physical exhaustion due to high levels of stress, heavy workload and occasional
Methods
As the study sought to gain an understanding of a phenomenon from the perspective of the individuals experiencing it, a qualitative approach was utilised (Burns and Grove, 2011, Neergaart et al., 2009). The participants’ experiences and perceptions were elicited in focus group discussions which, apart from being more time-efficient and cost-effective than a series of one-to-one interviews, have the potential to generate new ideas through verbal interaction driven by group dynamics (Krueger and
Ethical considerations
This study (conducted as the first author’s Master’s project) was approved by the University of Hertfordshire Ethics Committee and by the managements of the ICU and of the local hospital. Participation was informed and consensual. All parties signed confidentiality agreements to ensure the participants’ anonymity.
Findings
The study findings are organised in seven themes, illustrated by direct quotes from participants.
Discussion
These findings present the ICU culture as one where delirium care is marginalised. While nurses’ perceptions of delirium as a low priority issue have been reported in earlier studies (Devlin et al., 2008, Price, 2004, Scott et al., 2013), such views have not been explicitly linked with the characteristic for ICU reliance on sophisticated technology in patient management, where the degree of critical illness is judged by the amount of employed equipment (Almerud et al., 2007, Walters, 1995).
Limitations
Since participants were recruited from one ICU, the findings may not be readily transferrable to other units or hospitals. The absence of male nurses in the sample could have resulted in loss of additional perspectives. The findings may be affected by sample bias, as participants could have a particular interest in delirium care. Also, due to the researcher’s inexperience in moderating focus groups, several opportunities to explore the topic further in the first discussion were only noticed
Conclusion
This study has revealed the influence of ICU culture on perceiving delirium as a low priority matter, and replication of some misconceptions about delirium and CAM-ICU. It has also suggested that nurses’ longer exposure to established delirium practices has not resulted in their increased confidence in assessing or managing delirium. The study has furthermore demonstrated that the current approach to delirium care is seen as unsatisfactory, and that nurses ought to receive support in caring for
Funding source information
The authors have no sources of funding to declare.
Conflicts of interest
None.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the participants in the focus group discussions for devoting their time to share their professional experiences and reflections. We also thank the ICU managers and the research assistants for facilitating the realisation of this research project.
References (66)
- et al.
A questionnaire survey of critical care nurses’ attitudes to delirium assessment before and after introduction of the CAM-ICU
Aust. Crit. Care
(2012) - et al.
Delirium – awareness, observation and interventions in intensive care units: a national survey of Swedish ICU head nurses
Intens. Crit. Care Nurs.
(2010) - et al.
Nurses’ perceptions of communication training in the ICU
Intensive Crit. Care Nurs.
(2012) - et al.
Limitations and practicalities of CAM-ICU implementation a delirium scoring system, in a Dutch intensive care unit
Intensive Crit. Care Nurs.
(2009) - et al.
Implementation of a delirium assessment tool in critically ill adults
Intensive Crit. Care Nurs.
(2013) - et al.
Intensive care unit environment continuing education in anaesthesia
Crit. Care Pain
(2009) - et al.
A qualitative study on experience of nurses caring for patients with delirium in ICUs in China: barriers, burdens and decision- making dilemmas
Int. J. Nurs. Sci.
(2015) Practice guideline for the treatment of patients with delirium
Am. J. Psychiatry
(1999)- et al.
Communication with critically ill patients
J. Adv. Nurs.
(2005) - et al.
Vigilance and invisibility- being a patient in technological intense environments
Nurs. Crit. Care
(2007)