Translation and validation of the Tibetan confusion assessment method for the intensive care unit.

BACKGROUND: At present, there is no available delirium translated assessment method for 3.3 million Tibetans. This study aimed to provide a method for delirium assessment for Tibetan patients speaking this language by validating a translation of the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU). METHODS: The study was conducted between July 2018 and November 2018. Patients were screened for delirium by a neurologist using the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders IV (DSM-IV). Patients were subsequently screened by two nurses using Tibetan translations of the CAM-ICU. With DSM-IV criterion as the reference standard, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated to assess the validity of the CAM-ICU criterion. Interrater reliability was determined by comparing the CAM-ICU ratings of nurse 1 vs. nurse 2 using the κ coefficient. RESULTS: Ninety-six patients were assessed independently by two nurses and one neurologist. According to DSM-IV standard, 42 out of 96 (43.8%) patients developed delirium. The sensitivities of Tibetan CAM-ICU were 90.5% for nurse 1 and 92.9% for nurse 2, respectively. Their specificities were 85.2% and 90.7%, respectively. The PPV were 82.6% for nurse 1 and 88.6% for nurse 2. Their NPV were 92.0% and 94.2%, respectively. The Tibetan CAM-ICU was done with good interrater reliability between nurse 1 and nurse 2 (κ = 0.91, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The Tibetan CAM-ICU shows good validity and might be incorporated into clinical practice in Tibetan Intensive Care Units. CLINICAL TRAIL REGISTRY:: www.chictr.org.cn (No. ChiCTR1800018231).

Role of using two-route ulinastatin injection to alleviate intestinal injury in septic rats.

PURPOSE: Early application of protease inhibitors through the intestinal lumen could increase survival following experimental shock by blocking the pancreatic digestive enzymes. Hence, it was hypothesized that two-route injection (intraintestinal + intravenous) of ulinastatin (UTI), a broad-spectrum protease inhibitor, could better alleviate intestinal injury than single-route injection (either intravenous or intraintestinal). METHODS: A sepsis model induced by lipopolysaccharide on rats was established. The rats were randomly divided into five groups: sham, sepsis, UTI intravenous injection (Uiv), UTI intraintestinal injection (Uii), and UTI intraintestinal + intravenous injection (Uii + Uiv) groups. The mucosal barrier function, enzyme-blocking effect, levels of systemic inflammatory cytokines, and 5-day survival rate were compared among groups. The small intestinal villus height (VH), crypt depth (CD), and two components of mucosal barrier (E-cadherin and mucin-2) were measured to evaluate the mucosal barrier function. The levels of trypsin and neutrophil elastase (NE) in the intestine, serum, and vital organs were measured to determine the enzyme-blocking effect. RESULTS: Compared with the single-route injection group (Uiv or Uii), the two-route injection (Uii + Uiv) group displayed: (1) significantly higher levels of VH, VH/CD, E-cadherin, and mucin-2; (2) decreased trypsin and NE levels in intestine, plasma, and vital organs; (3) reduced systemic inflammatory cytokine levels; and (4) improved survival of septic rats. CONCLUSION: Two-route UTI injection was superior to single-route injection in terms of alleviating intestinal injury, which might be explained by extensive blockade of proteases through different ways.