A world-wide study on delirium assessments and presence of protocols.

BACKGROUND: Delirium is a common complication of older people in hospitals, rehabilitation and long-term facilities. OBJECTIVE: To assess the worldwide use of validated delirium assessment tools and the presence of delirium management protocols. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a worldwide one-day point prevalence study on World Delirium Awareness Day, 15 March 2023. SETTING: Cross-sectional online survey including hospitals, rehabilitation and long-term facilities. METHODS: Participating clinicians reported data on delirium, the presence of protocols, delirium assessments, delirium-awareness interventions, non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions, and ward/unit-specific barriers. RESULTS: Data from 44 countries, 1664 wards/units and 36 048 patients were analysed. Validated delirium assessments were used in 66.7% (n = 1110) of wards/units, 18.6% (n = 310) used personal judgement or no assessment, and 10% (n = 166) used other assessment methods. A delirium management protocol was reported in 66.8% (n = 1094) of wards/units. The presence of protocols for delirium management varied across continents, ranging from 21.6% (on 21/97 wards/units) in Africa to 90.4% (235/260) in Australia, similar to the use of validated delirium assessments with 29.6% (29/98) in Africa to 93.5% (116/124) in North America. Wards/units with a delirium management protocol [n = 1094/1664, 66.8%] were more likely to use a validated delirium test than those without a protocol [odds ratio 6.97 (95% confidence interval 5.289-9.185)]. The presence of a delirium protocol increased the chances for valid delirium assessment and, likely, evidence-based interventions. CONCLUSION: Wards/units that reported the presence of delirium management protocols had a higher probability of using validated delirium assessments tools to assess for delirium.

A joint frailty model for recurrent and competing terminal events: Application to delirium in the ICU.

Joint models linking longitudinal biomarkers or recurrent event processes with a terminal event, for example, mortality, have been studied extensively. Motivated by studies of recurrent delirium events in patients receiving care in an intensive care unit (ICU), we devise a joint model for a recurrent event process and multiple terminal events. Being discharged alive from the ICU or experiencing mortality may be associated with a patient's hazard of delirium, violating the assumption of independent censoring. Moreover, the direction of the association between the hazards of delirium and mortality may be opposite of the direction of association between the hazards of delirium and ICU discharge. Hence treating either terminal event as independent censoring may bias inferences. We propose a competing joint model that uses a latent frailty to link a patient's recurrent and competing terminal event processes. We fit our model to data from a completed placebo-controlled clinical trial, which studied whether Haloperidol could prevent death and delirium among ICU patients. The clinical trial served as a foundation for a simulation study, in which we evaluate the properties, for example, bias and confidence interval coverage, of the competing joint model. As part of the simulation study, we demonstrate the shortcomings of using a joint model with a recurrent delirium process and a single terminal event to study delirium in the ICU. Lastly, we discuss limitations and possible extensions for the competing joint model. The competing joint model has been added to frailtypack, an R package for fitting an assortment of joint models.

Inter-rater agreement between patient- and proxy-reported cognitive functioning in intensive care unit patients: A cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Health status, including cognitive functioning before critical illness, is associated with long-term outcomes in intensive care unit survivors. Premorbid data are therefore of importance in longitudinal studies. Few patients can self-report at intensive care admission. Consequently, proxy assessments of patients' health status are used. However, it remains unclear how accurately proxies can report on an intensive care patient's cognitive status. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to examine the agreement between patient- and proxy-reporting of the Cognitive Failures Questionnaire and to compare the agreement between proxy reports using the latter questionnaire and the Informant Questionnaire of Cognitive Decline in the Elderly as a reference. METHODS: The present cohort study is part of a longitudinal multicentre study collecting both patient and proxy data using questionnaires and clinical data from medical records during intensive care unit stays. Agreement on patient and proxy pairs was examined using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), Spearman's correlation, percentage agreement, and Gwet's AC1 statistics. Agreement between the proxy-reported questionnaires was examined using percentage agreement and Gwet's AC1 statistics. RESULTS: In total, we collected 99 pairs of patient-proxy assessments and 158 proxy-proxy assessments. The ICC for the sum scores revealed moderate agreement (n = 99; ICC = 0.59; 99% confidence interval [CI]: [0.30-0.76]) between patient and proxy. Agreement on items was poor (AC1 = 0.13; 99% CI: [0.01-0.24]) to moderate (AC1 = 0.55; 99% CI: [0.43-0.68]). Agreement using cut-off scores (>43) to indicate cognitive impairment was very good (89.9%, AC1 = 0.87; 99% CI: [0.79-0.95]). Agreement between the proxy-reported Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (>43) and the reference questionnaire (≥3.5) was also very good (n = 158; 85%, AC1 = 0.82; 99% CI: [0.74-0.90]). CONCLUSIONS: Proxy assessments of the Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (>43) may be used to indicate cognitive impairment if patients are unable to self-report. Agreement was high between the two questionnaires determined by proxies, showing that these can be used interchangeably to assess cognitive functioning if proxy reporting is needed.

Acute encephalopathy in the ICU: a practical approach.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Acute encephalopathy (AE) - which frequently develops in critically ill patients with and without primary brain injury - is defined as an acute process that evolves rapidly and leads to changes in baseline cognitive status, ranging from delirium to coma. The diagnosis, monitoring, and management of AE is challenging. Here, we discuss advances in definitions, diagnostic approaches, therapeutic options, and implications to outcomes of the clinical spectrum of AE in ICU patients without primary brain injury. RECENT FINDINGS: Understanding and definitions of delirium and coma have evolved. Delirium is a neurocognitive disorder involving impairment of attention and cognition, usually fluctuating, and developing over hours to days. Coma is a state of unresponsiveness, with absence of command following, intelligible speech, or visual pursuit, with no imaging or neurophysiological evidence of cognitive motor dissociation. The CAM-ICU(-7) and the ICDSC are validated, guideline-recommended tools for clinical delirium assessment, with identification of clinical subtypes and stratification of severity. In comatose patients, the roles of continuous EEG monitoring and neuroimaging have grown for the early detection of secondary brain injury and treatment of reversible causes. SUMMARY: Evidence-based pharmacologic treatments for delirium are limited. Dexmedetomidine is effective for mechanically ventilated patients with delirium, while haloperidol has minimal effect of delirium but may have other benefits. Specific treatments for coma in nonprimary brain injury are still lacking.

The Delphi Delirium Management Algorithms. A practical tool for clinicians, the result of a modified Delphi expert consensus approach.

Delirium is common in hospitalised patients, and there is currently no specific treatment. Identifying and treating underlying somatic causes of delirium is the first priority once delirium is diagnosed. Several international guidelines provide clinicians with an evidence-based approach to screening, diagnosis and symptomatic treatment. However, current guidelines do not offer a structured approach to identification of underlying causes. A panel of 37 internationally recognised delirium experts from diverse medical backgrounds worked together in a modified Delphi approach via an online platform. Consensus was reached after five voting rounds. The final product of this project is a set of three delirium management algorithms (the Delirium Delphi Algorithms), one for ward patients, one for patients after cardiac surgery and one for patients in the intensive care unit.

Effect of a Standardized Family Participation Program in the ICU: A Multicenter Stepped-Wedge Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect of a standardized program for family participation in essential care activities in the ICU on symptoms of anxiety, depression, posttraumatic stress and satisfaction among relatives, and perceptions and experiences of ICU healthcare providers (HCPs). DESIGN: Multicenter stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Seven adult ICUs, one university, and six general teaching hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Three hundred six relatives and 235 ICU HCPs. INTERVENTIONS: A standardized program to facilitate family participation inpatient communication, amusement/distraction, comfort, personal care, breathing, mobilization, and nutrition. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Data were collected through surveys among relatives and ICU HCPs. There were no significant differences in symptoms of anxiety in relatives in the intervention period compared with the control period (median Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale [HADS] 5 [interquartile range (IQR) 2-10] vs 6 [IQR 3-9]; median ratio [MR] 0.72; 95% CI, 0.46-1.13; p = 0.15), depression (median HADS 4 [IQR 2-6] vs 3 [IQR 1-6]; MR 0.85; 95% CI, 0.55-1.32; p = 0.47) or posttraumatic stress (median Impact of Event Scale-Revised score 0.45 [IQR 0.27-0.82] vs 0.41 [IQR 0.14-1]; MR 0.94; 95% CI, 0.78-1.14; p = 0.54). Reported satisfaction was slightly lower in the intervention period (mean 8.90 [ sd 1.10] vs mean 9.06 [ sd 1.10], difference -0.60; 95% CI, -1.07 to -0.12; p = 0.01). ICU HCPs perceived that more relatives knew how to participate: 47% in the intervention period versus 22% in the control period (odds ratio [OR] 3.15; 95% CI, 1.64-6.05; p < 0.01). They also reported relatives having sufficient knowledge (41% vs 16%; OR 3.56; 95% CI, 1.75-7.25; p < 0.01) and skills (44% vs 25%; OR 2.38; 95% CI, 1.22-4.63; p = 0.01) to apply family participation. CONCLUSIONS: Application of a standardized program to facilitate family participation did not change mental health symptoms in relatives of ICU patients 3 months after discharge. ICU HCPs reported increased clarity, knowledge, and skills among relatives and ICU HCPs.

Prediction of Long-Term Physical, Mental, and Cognitive Problems Following Critical Illness: Development and External Validation of the PROSPECT Prediction Model.

OBJECTIVES: ICU survivors often suffer from long-lasting physical, mental, and cognitive health problems after hospital discharge. As several interventions that treat or prevent these problems already start during ICU stay, patients at high risk should be identified early. This study aimed to develop a model for early prediction of post-ICU health problems within 48 hours after ICU admission. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study in seven Dutch ICUs. SETTING/PATIENTS: ICU patients older than 16 years and admitted for greater than or equal to 12 hours between July 2016 and March 2020. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Outcomes were physical problems (fatigue or ≥ 3 new physical symptoms), mental problems (anxiety, depression, or post-traumatic stress disorder), and cognitive impairment. Patient record data and questionnaire data were collected at ICU admission, and after 3 and 12 months, of 2,476 patients. Several models predicting physical, mental, or cognitive problems and a composite score at 3 and 12 months were developed using variables collected within 48 hours after ICU admission. Based on performance and clinical feasibility, a model, PROSPECT, predicting post-ICU health problems at 3 months was chosen, including the predictors of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, admission type, expected length of ICU stay greater than or equal to 2 days, and preadmission anxiety and fatigue. Internal validation using bootstrapping on data of the largest hospital ( n = 1,244) yielded a C -statistic of 0.73 (95% CI, 0.70-0.76). External validation was performed on data ( n = 864) from the other six hospitals with a C -statistic of 0.77 (95% CI, 0.73-0.80). CONCLUSIONS: The developed and externally validated PROSPECT model can be used within 48 hours after ICU admission for identifying patients with an increased risk of post-ICU problems 3 months after ICU admission. Timely preventive interventions starting during ICU admission and follow-up care can prevent or mitigate post-ICU problems in these high-risk patients.

A multicomponent intervention program to Prevent and Reduce AgItation and phySical rEstraint use in the ICU (PRAISE): study protocol for a multicenter, stepped-wedge, cluster randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Physical restraints remain to be commonly used in agitated intensive care unit (ICU) patients worldwide, despite a lack of evidence on efficacy and safety and reports of detrimental short and long-term consequences, such as prolonged delirium and a longer ICU length of stay. Physical restraint minimization approaches have focused mainly on educational strategies and other non-pharmacological interventions. Combining these interventions with goal-directed light sedation therapy if needed may play an important contributory role in further reducing the use of physical restraints. The aim of the study is to determine the effectiveness of a multicomponent intervention (MCI) program, combining person-centered non-pharmacological interventions with goal-directed light sedation, compared to physical restraints. METHODS: A multicenter stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial will be conducted in six Dutch ICUs. A power calculation based total of 480 (expected to become) agitated adult patients will be included in 26 months with a subsequent 2-year follow-up. Patients included in the control period will receive standard care with the current agitation management protocol including physical restraints. Patients included in the intervention period will be treated with the MCI program, consisting of four components, without physical restraints: education of ICU professionals, identification of patients at risk for agitation, formulation of a multidisciplinary person-centered care plan including non-pharmacological and medical interventions, and protocolized goal-directed light sedation using dexmedetomidine. Primary outcome is the number of days alive and outside of the ICU within 28 days after ICU admission. Secondary outcomes include length of hospital stay; 3-, 12-, and 24-month post-ICU quality of life; physical (fatigue, frailty, new physical problems), mental (anxiety, depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder), and cognitive health; and 1-year cost-effectiveness. A process evaluation will be conducted. DISCUSSION: This will be the first multicenter randomized controlled trial determining the effect of a combination of non-pharmacological interventions and light sedation using dexmedetomidine compared to physical restraints in agitated ICU patients. The results of this study, including long-term patient-centered outcomes, will provide relevant insights to aid ICU professionals in the management of agitated patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05783505, registration date 23 March 2023.

Efficacy of haloperidol to decrease the burden of delirium in adult critically ill patients: the EuRIDICE randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The role of haloperidol as treatment for ICU delirium and related symptoms remains controversial despite two recent large controlled trials evaluating its efficacy and safety. We sought to determine whether haloperidol when compared to placebo in critically ill adults with delirium reduces days with delirium and coma and improves delirium-related sequelae. METHODS: This multi-center double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial at eight mixed medical-surgical Dutch ICUs included critically ill adults with delirium (Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist ≥ 4 or a positive Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU) admitted between February 2018 and January 2020. Patients were randomized to intravenous haloperidol 2.5 mg or placebo every 8 h, titrated up to 5 mg every 8 h if delirium persisted until ICU discharge or up to 14 days. The primary outcome was ICU delirium- and coma-free days (DCFDs) within 14 days after randomization. Predefined secondary outcomes included the protocolized use of sedatives for agitation and related behaviors, patient-initiated extubation and invasive device removal, adverse drug associated events, mechanical ventilation, ICU length of stay, 28-day mortality, and long-term outcomes up to 1-year after randomization. RESULTS: The trial was terminated prematurely for primary endpoint futility on DSMB advice after enrolment of 132 (65 haloperidol; 67 placebo) patients [mean age 64 (15) years, APACHE IV score 73.1 (33.9), male 68%]. Haloperidol did not increase DCFDs (adjusted RR 0.98 [95% CI 0.73-1.31], p = 0.87). Patients treated with haloperidol (vs. placebo) were less likely to receive benzodiazepines (adjusted OR 0.41 [95% CI 0.18-0.89], p = 0.02). Effect measures of other secondary outcomes related to agitation (use of open label haloperidol [OR 0.43 (95% CI 0.12-1.56)] and other antipsychotics [OR 0.63 (95% CI 0.29-1.32)], self-extubation or invasive device removal [OR 0.70 (95% CI 0.22-2.18)]) appeared consistently more favorable with haloperidol, but the confidence interval also included harm. Adverse drug events were not different. Long-term secondary outcomes (e.g., ICU recall and quality of life) warrant further study. CONCLUSIONS: Haloperidol does not reduce delirium in critically ill delirious adults. However, it may reduce rescue medication requirements and agitation-related events in delirious ICU patients warranting further evaluation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (#NCT03628391), October 9, 2017.

The Impact of Non-Pharmacological Interventions on Delirium in Neurological Intensive Care Unit Patients: A Single-Center Interrupted Time Series Trial.

Background: Delirium is a pathobiological brain process that is frequently observed in Intensive Care Unit (ICU) patients, and is associated with longer hospitalization as well as long-term cognitive impairment. In neurological ICU patients, delirium may be more treatment-resistant due to the initial brain injury. This study examined the effects of a multicomponent non-pharmacological nursing intervention program on delirium in neurological ICU patients. Methods: A single-center interrupted time series trial was conducted in adult neurological ICU patients at high risk for developing delirium who were non-delirious at admission. A multicomponent nursing intervention program focusing on modifiable risk factors for delirium, including the optimalization of vision, hearing, orientation and cognition, sleep and mobilization, was implemented as the standard of care, and its effects were studied. The primary outcome was the number of delirium-free and coma-free days alive at 28 days after ICU admission. The secondary outcomes included delirium incidence and duration, ICU and hospital length-of-stay and duration of mechanical ventilation. Results: Of 289 eligible patients admitted to the ICU, 130 patients were included, with a mean age of 68 ± 11 years, a mean APACHE-IV score of 79 ± 25 and a median predicted delirium risk (E-PRE-DELIRIC) score of 42 [IQR 38-50]). Of these, 73 were included in the intervention period and 57 in the control period. The median delirium- and coma-free days alive were 15 days [IQR 0-26] in the intervention group and 10 days [IQR 0-24] in the control group (level change -0.48 days, 95% confidence interval (95%CI) -7 to 6 days, p = 0.87; slope change -0.95 days, 95%CI -2.41 to 0.52 days, p = 0.18). Conclusions: In neurological ICU patients, our multicomponent non-pharmacological nursing intervention program did not change the number of delirium-free and coma-free days alive after 28 days.

Patients' lived body experiences in the intensive care unit and beyond - a meta-ethnographic synthesis.

INTRODUCTION: Physical therapists supporting patients in intensive care unit (ICU) rehabilitation can improve their clinical practice with insight in patients' lived body experiences. OBJECTIVE: To gain insight in patients' lived body experiences during ICU stay and in recovery from critical illness. METHODS: Through a comprehensive systematic literature search, 45 empirical phenomenological studies were identified. Patients' lived body experiences were extracted from these studies and synthesized following the seven-phase interpretative approach as described by Noblit and Hare. RESULTS: Three lines of argument were illuminated: 1) "recovery from critical illness starts from a situation in which patients experience the lived body as unable;" 2) "patients experience progress in recovery from critical illness when the lived body is empowered;" and 3) "recovery from critical illness results in a lived body changed for life." Eleven third-order constructs were formulated as different kinds of bodies: 1) "an intolerable body;" 2) "an alienated body;" 3) "a powerless body;" 4) "a dependent body;" 5) "a restricted body;" 6) "a muted body;" 7) "a touched body;" 8) "a transforming body;" 9) "a re-discovering body;" 10) "an unhomelike body;" and 11) "a remembering body." CONCLUSION: Patients' lived body experiences during ICU stay and in recovery from critical illness have richly been described in phenomenological studies and were synthesized in this meta-ethnography.

[Prevention of delirium in the Intensive Care Unit]. / Preventie van delier op de intensive care.

Delirium is highly prevalent in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) and is strongly associated with negative patient outcomes. We aimed to present an overview of the effectiveness of non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions to prevent delirium in ICU patients. Multicomponent non-pharmacological interventions are proven effective in the prevention of delirium. These interventions are aimed at multiple domains, including re-orientation, providing a safe and healing environment, cognitive stimulation, mobilization and family engagement. A special type of multicomponent intervention is the ''A-F bundle'', comprising both non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions. Multicomponent non-pharmacological interventions and the ''A-F bundle'' are recommended. There is insufficient evidence for the effectiveness of pharmacological prophylaxis using antipsychotics, dexmedetomidine, melatonin or thiamin, except for delirium due to substance withdrawal. Therefore, pharmacological interventions should be aimed at minimizing delirogenousmedication (especially benzodiazepines and opiates), adequate pain management and the prevention of deep and continuous sedation.

The Clinical Frailty Scale for mortality prediction of old acutely admitted intensive care patients: a meta-analysis of individual patient-level data.

BACKGROUND: This large-scale analysis pools individual data about the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) to predict outcome in the intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: A systematic search identified all clinical trials that used the CFS in the ICU (PubMed searched until 24th June 2020). All patients who were electively admitted were excluded. The primary outcome was ICU mortality. Regression models were estimated on the complete data set, and for missing data, multiple imputations were utilised. Cox models were adjusted for age, sex, and illness acuity score (SOFA, SAPS II or APACHE II). RESULTS: 12 studies from 30 countries with anonymised individualised patient data were included (n = 23,989 patients). In the univariate analysis for all patients, being frail (CFS ≥ 5) was associated with an increased risk of ICU mortality, but not after adjustment. In older patients (≥ 65 years) there was an independent association with ICU mortality both in the complete case analysis (HR 1.34 (95% CI 1.25-1.44), p < 0.0001) and in the multiple imputation analysis (HR 1.35 (95% CI 1.26-1.45), p < 0.0001, adjusted for SOFA). In older patients, being vulnerable (CFS 4) alone did not significantly differ from being frail. After adjustment, a CFS of 4-5, 6, and ≥ 7 was associated with a significantly worse outcome compared to CFS of 1-3. CONCLUSIONS: Being frail is associated with a significantly increased risk for ICU mortality in older patients, while being vulnerable alone did not significantly differ. New Frailty categories might reflect its "continuum" better and predict ICU outcome more accurately. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework (OSF: https://osf.io/8buwk/ ).

Post-intensive care syndrome in primary care: The development of new diseases and primary care services utilisation - a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Patients experience long-lasting health problems defined as post-intensive care syndrome (PICS) after Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission. Little is known about PICS in primary care. OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether ICU survivors encounter more new International Classification of Primary Care-2 (ICPC-2) diagnoses and general practitioner (GP) contact compared to patients with similar comorbidity without ICU admission. METHODS: Prospective multicentre cohort study in three Dutch general practices. Numbers of disease-episodes and GP contacts of ICU survivors ≥ 16 years admitted between 2008 and 2017 were extracted from GPs' information systems. A non-ICU reference cohort was matched 1:1 for age, sex, follow-up period and comorbidity groups from patients' medical history. Negative binominal regression analysis was used to compare both cohorts 0-3, 3-6, 6-12 months, 1-2 and 2-5 years after ICU admission and 1 year prior to admission. RESULTS: ICU survivors (n = 199) encountered more new disease-episodes 1 year before (mean 3.97 (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.50-4.52]]; reference 2.36 [1.28-3.17]) to 2-5 years after ICU admission (3.65 [3.15-4.26]; reference 2.86 [2.52-3.22]). ICU survivors also had more GP contacts 1 year before (mean 19.61 [17.31-22.17]; reference 10.02 [7.81-12.38]) to 2-5 years after ICU admission (18.53 [15.58-21.85]; reference 12.03 [10.33-13.91]). Patients with prior ICU admission did not encounter patterns in specific ICPC-2 chapters compared to non-ICU patients. CONCLUSION: Patients admitted to the ICU encounter more new primary care disease-episodes and GP contacts. As patients present their symptoms to their GP first, it is therefore up to the GP to recognise these critical illness-related symptoms.

The Effectiveness of the Interventions to Reduce Sound Levels in the ICU: A Systematic Review.

Excessive noise is ubiquitous in the ICU, and there is growing evidence of the negative impact on work performance of caregivers. This study aims to determine the effectiveness of interventions to reduce noise in the ICU. DATA SOURCES: Databases of PubMed, EMBASE, PsychINFO, CINAHL, and Web of Science were systematically searched from inception to September 14, 2022. STUDY SELECTION: Two independent reviewers assessed titles and abstracts against study eligibility criteria. Noise mitigating ICU studies were included when having at least one quantitative acoustic outcome measure expressed in A-weighted sound pressure level with an experimental, quasi-experimental, or observational design. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus, and a third independent reviewer adjudicated as necessary. DATA EXTRACTION: After title, abstract, and full-text selection, two reviewers independently assessed the quality of each study using the Cochrane's Risk Of Bias In Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions tool. Data were synthesized according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines, and interventions were summarized. DATA SYNTHESIS: After screening 12,652 articles, 25 articles were included, comprising either a mixed group of healthcare professionals (n = 17) or only nurses (n = 8) from adult or PICU settings. Overall, the methodological quality of the studies was low. Noise reduction interventions were categorized into education (n = 4), warning devices (n = 3), multicomponent programs (n = 15), and architectural redesign (n = 3). Education, a noise warning device, and an architectural redesign significantly decreased the sound pressure levels. CONCLUSIONS: Staff education and visual alert systems seem promising interventions to reduce noise with a short-term effect. The evidence of the studied multicomponent intervention studies, which may lead to the best results, is still low. Therefore, high-quality studies with a low risk of bias and a long-term follow-up are warranted. Embedding noise shielding within the ICU-redesign is supportive to reduce sound pressure levels.