Comparison of the effectiveness of delirium evaluation tools in intensive care patients: pre-deliric versions 1 and 2, E-pre-deliric and ICDSC.

OBJECTIVE: This study's objective was to compare the effectiveness of the delirium prediction model (pre-deliric) and the early prediction model (E-pre-deliric) in delirium prediction in an intensive care unit (ICU) according to the Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist (ICDSC). Our aim was to determine these models' usability and cut-off values for ICU patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We classified the studied patients based on their highest ICDSC scores (tested twice daily) during ICU hospitalization. ICDSC scores of 4 or higher indicated positive results for delirium, whereas a score of 0 represented a negative result. We recorded the patients' demographic and clinical details and characteristics and calculated their E-pre-deliric and pre-deliric version 1 and version 2 scores. To evaluate the effectiveness of the models, we used receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty patients (55.6% males, mean age 60.6±18.7 years) participated in this study. Their mean Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE-II) score was 17.0±9.1. Delirium was more common in men, patients of older ages, those with high APACHE-II scores, those who had undergone urgent admissions, those with histories of trauma, those with high urea or creatinine values and those who had undergone sedation or mechanical ventilation. Compared to patients who did not develop delirium, those who did had longer ICU stays and hospital stays, as well as greater mortality risk. The cutoff values for the patients' pre-deliric version 1, pre-deliric version 2 and E-pre-deliric scores were 38% [area under ROC (AUROC)=1], 22% (AUROC=1) and 28% (AUROC=1), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to compare the pre-deliric and E-pre-deliric prediction models. These models' validity and reliability were acceptable. They were clinically useful, and we identified their cut-off values. These models provide options for early detection of delirium and are easily applicable in the ICU.

Prognosis and risk factors of nerve injuries in displaced pediatric supracondylar humerus fractures.

BACKGROUND: Supracondylar humerus (SCH) fractures are serious injuries due to the neighborhood of critical neural and vascular structures. One of the most devastating complications of SCH fractures is neurological damage, since it may cause permanent disability. The aim of this study is to categorize neurological complications, to report long-term functional outcomes, and to determine risk factors associated with childhood SCH fractures. METHODS: The records of 375 children were reviewed retrospectively. Data about amount and direction of displacement, the shape of the fracture, age at the time of fracture, gender, time from impaction to surgery, time of surgery, type of neurological injury, and recovery time were recorded. RESULTS: Neurological complications were seen in 37 (9.85%) children. Thirteen (35.1%) of the children had an iatrogenic nerve injury. All iatrogenic injuries were fully recovered in this study. However, 2 children who had combined neurological injury of radial, ulnar, and median nerves did not recover. Nearly 95% of all children who had neurological injury recovered fully. An anterior long and sharp bone fragment (spike) was observed in most of the children with neurological injury, and this spike was seen in 14 (58.3%) patients who had a trauma-related injury (n = 24). CONCLUSION: The prognosis of these nerve injuries is excellent, especially the iatrogenic ones. A long and sharp bone fragment (spike) may be responsible for nerve injuries in some children. Surgical exploration is not necessary after an iatrogenic nerve injury when there is no neurotmesis. Patience and care are utmost needed to handle neurological complications.

Prognostic factors other than the performance status and age for glioblastoma multiforme: a single-institution experience.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the survival of patients with glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) and analyse the prognostic factors influencing survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventy-eight consecutive patients with GBM treated with radiotherapy (RT) and temozolomide (TMZ) (in 21 patients) between 1999 and 2006 were retrospectively analysed. RESULTS: Sixty-seven (85.5%) patients had undergone gross total or subtotal resection before RT. The median overall survival was 9.8 months, and significantly influenced by age (p=0.02), Karnofsky performance status (p=0.001), RT (p<0.0001), gender (p=0.02), concomitant TMZ (p=0.003), RT waiting time (p=0.014), and treatment time (p=0.01) in univariate analysis. In multivariate analysis, older age (p=0.03), male gender (p=0.01), absence of concomitant TMZ (p=0.008), RT dose below 60 Gy (p=0.03), RT waiting time more than 20 days (p=0.01), and treatment time more than 76 days (p=0.0072) were poor prognosticators. CONCLUSION: This study emphasizes the importance of female gender, dose and duration of RT, and RT waiting time in patients with glioblastoma multiforme.

The use of intraarticular tramadol for postoperative analgesia after arthroscopic knee surgery: a comparison of different intraarticular and intravenous doses.

We aimed to determine the optimal dose of tramadol when administered intraarticularly after arthroscopic knee surgery under general anesthesia in patients with an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status score of I-II. When the surgical procedure was completed, patients were assigned to one of seven groups ( n=30 for each) in a double-blinded and randomized manner according to a table of random numbers. Group I received 100 mg tramadol, Group II received 50 mg tramadol, Group III received 20 mg tramadol and Group IV received 0.9% NaCl intraarticularly in 20 ml solutions. Group V received 100 mg tramadol, Group VI received 50 mg tramadol and Group VII received 20 mg tramadol intravenously. Pain was evaluated by using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at 0 min (when the patient was cooperated after extubation), 30 min, 1 h, 4 h, 6 h, 12 h, 18 h and 24 h postoperatively. Patients were administered diclofenac sodium 75 mg intravenously (i.m.) when they experienced pain. The intraarticular tramadol groups had longer duration of analgesia than i.v. tramadol groups who were administered the same doses (I vs V; II vs VI; III vs VII; p <0.001). Group I had the longest duration of analgesia ( p<0.001). Group II had a longer time to the first analgesic request than all other groups ( p<0.001) except Group I. Consequently, Group I and II needed less analgesics than other groups ( p<0.001). Pain scores were 0-3 on the VAS in Groups I, II and V at first assessment, in Groups I and II at 30 min and 1 h, and in Group I at 4 h and 6 h postoperatively ( p<0.01). In Group V, vomiting was more a more frequent complication than with other groups ( p<0.05). It is concluded that tramadol provides analgesia with a peripheral mechanism when administered intraarticularly. The side effects of intraarticular 100 mg tramadol were no more severe than those for intraarticular 50 mg tramadol. Moreover, intraarticular 100 mg tramadol provided excellent analgesia after arthroscopic surgery.