Predicting Emergency Department Delirium With an Interactive Customizable Tablet to Prevent Repeat Visits

NCT ID: NCT03423875

Last Updated: 2019-04-10

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

UNKNOWN

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

1375 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2018-03-01

Study Completion Date

2020-03-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Delirium is a common and serious complication of medical care that affects 10% of older Emergency Department (ED) patients, which unfortunately is unrecognized in up to 75% of ED patients.Studies have shown that 26 - 42% of patient with delirium are sent home. And 80% of patients sent home with unrecognized delirium are re-hospitalized within 4 days. Unrecognized delirium also has grave consequences for patient care - Kakuma showed that patient with unrecognized delirium who were sent home had 3-8x the mortality rate of patients with recognized delirium at 6 months.

Fluctuating severity over time is a key clinical characteristics of delirium, making its diagnosis challenging. Regardless of cause, failure to recognize delirium means that ED staff cannot meet their patient"s needs. For example, ED staff may miss serious medical conditions associated with delirium, may not provide understandable discharge instructions or ensure a caregiver can supervise and assist a patient with delirium who is discharged. These care adaptations require staff to recognize the presence of delirium. Thus it is not surprising that unrecognized delirium has such grave consequences for patients.

Thus recognition of delirium is critical to improving patient outcomes and reducing repeat ED visits. Patients with delirium may appear to have normal mental status at times, making its diagnosis challenging. High levels of service demand in the ED, plus the competing demands of numerous other initiatives to improve quality and reduce waiting times may explain why delirium continue to go unrecognized despite guidelines promoting routine delirium screening as a top priority in the ED. To address this care gap, the investigators developed an innovative solution. Rather than adding tasks to overburdened ED staff, our solution takes advantage of the long waiting times clients have in the ED for their initial assessments and between interactions with clinical staff. During these times, patients will use the PrEDICT "serious game" - similar to the Whack-a-Mole carnival game. The investigators have developed an algorithm based on participants" performance on this simple but serious game that can identify patients at high risk for delirium.

The investigators propose to conduct a prospective, multi-center randomized clinical trial in 4 provinces. The primary objective of this study is to assess the impact of our tablet technology on the recognition of delirium by ED staff. All eligible patients who agree to participate will be treated in the same manner and will play the PrEDICT tablet based game. The investigators will randomly assign half of patients to have their test performance shared with clinical staff. Patients assigned to the control condition will be treated using the current standard of care, clinical assessments, to identify delirium.

This project will allow us to solidly advance this technology from a working prototype (TRL7) to a commercially ready product demonstrated effective in multiple "real-world" environments under expected operational conditions (TRL8). Also it will provide evidence that the PrEDICT tablet app is clinically, technically, commercially and operationally feasible.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Delirium

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

DIAGNOSTIC

Blinding Strategy

DOUBLE

Participants Outcome Assessors
To prevent outcome assessment bias, research staff will be masked as to the randomization status of participants until after they have completed and recorded gold-standard delirium assessments of delirium using the Confusion Assessment Method .

Similarly, ED physicians will be blinded to the gold standard assessments of delirium made by research assistants as well as the results of the PrEDICT test scores when they make their baseline clinical assessments of delirium. ED Physicians will also remain masked until they have recorded their discharge plan. The intervention focuses on the impact of revealing the result of the PrEDICT game scores on ED physicians' recognition of delirium, so randomization status must be revealed to them.

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Control

Patients assigned to the control condition will be treated using the current standard of care, clinical assessments, to identify delirium.

Group Type NO_INTERVENTION

No interventions assigned to this group

Intervention

PrEDICTgame score (subject's relative risk of delirium) will be shared with ED physicians in the intervention arm. After viewing the tests results, ED physicians will be asked to reassess delirium risk, and indicate if they would change their management based on the PrEDICT app scores.

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

PrEDICT game score

Intervention Type DIAGNOSTIC_TEST

PrEDICT game score will be shared with the emergency physicians and health care professionals

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

PrEDICT game score

PrEDICT game score will be shared with the emergency physicians and health care professionals

Intervention Type DIAGNOSTIC_TEST

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* 65 years of age and older
* Have been in the ED for a minimum of 4 hours at the time of screening

Exclusion Criteria

* Live in a full care nursing home
* Have a critical illness (Canadian Triage Acuity Score rendering them unable to communicate or provide consent)
* Have delirium prior to ED arrival
* Do not assent to study participation
* Have visual impairment that makes them unable to use the serious game tablet
* Have other communication difficulties preventing use of the serious game tablet
Minimum Eligible Age

65 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Nova Scotia Health Authority

Nova Scotia, Halifax, Canada

Site Status RECRUITING

Ottawa Hospital Research Institute

Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Site Status RECRUITING

Sunnybrook Research Institute

Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Site Status RECRUITING

CHU de Québec - Université Laval

Québec, Quebec, Canada

Site Status RECRUITING

Alberta Health Services

Calgary, , Canada

Site Status RECRUITING

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Canada

Central Contacts

Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.

Jacques S Lee, MD

Role: CONTACT

416-480-6100 ext. 7701

Joanna Yeung, HBSc

Role: CONTACT

416-480-6100 ext. 7702

Facility Contacts

Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.

Judah Goldstein

Role: primary

Cathy Clement

Role: primary

Joanna Yeung

Role: primary

Valérie Boucher

Role: primary

Hina Walia

Role: primary

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Hustey FM, Meldon SW. The prevalence and documentation of impaired mental status in elderly emergency department patients. Ann Emerg Med. 2002 Mar;39(3):248-53. doi: 10.1067/mem.2002.122057.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 11867976 (View on PubMed)

Kakuma R, du Fort GG, Arsenault L, Perrault A, Platt RW, Monette J, Moride Y, Wolfson C. Delirium in older emergency department patients discharged home: effect on survival. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2003 Apr;51(4):443-50. doi: 10.1046/j.1532-5415.2003.51151.x.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 12657062 (View on PubMed)

Adamis D, Treloar A, Darwiche FZ, Gregson N, Macdonald AJ, Martin FC. Associations of delirium with in-hospital and in 6-months mortality in elderly medical inpatients. Age Ageing. 2007 Nov;36(6):644-9. doi: 10.1093/ageing/afm094. Epub 2007 Jul 28.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 17660528 (View on PubMed)

McCusker J, Cole M, Abrahamowicz M, Primeau F, Belzile E. Delirium predicts 12-month mortality. Arch Intern Med. 2002 Feb 25;162(4):457-63. doi: 10.1001/archinte.162.4.457.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 11863480 (View on PubMed)

Lewis LM, Miller DK, Morley JE, Nork MJ, Lasater LC. Unrecognized delirium in ED geriatric patients. Am J Emerg Med. 1995 Mar;13(2):142-5. doi: 10.1016/0735-6757(95)90080-2.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 7893295 (View on PubMed)

Elie M, Rousseau F, Cole M, Primeau F, McCusker J, Bellavance F. Prevalence and detection of delirium in elderly emergency department patients. CMAJ. 2000 Oct 17;163(8):977-81.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 11068569 (View on PubMed)

Hustey FM, Meldon S, Palmer R. Prevalence and documentation of impaired mental status in elderly emergency department patients. Acad Emerg Med. 2000 Oct;7(10):1166.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 11015259 (View on PubMed)

Monette J, Galbaud du Fort G, Fung SH, Massoud F, Moride Y, Arsenault L, Afilalo M. Evaluation of the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) as a screening tool for delirium in the emergency room. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2001 Jan-Feb;23(1):20-5. doi: 10.1016/s0163-8343(00)00116-x.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 11226553 (View on PubMed)

Schuurmans MJ, Duursma SA, Shortridge-Baggett LM. Early recognition of delirium: review of the literature. J Clin Nurs. 2001 Nov;10(6):721-9. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2702.2001.00548.x.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 11822843 (View on PubMed)

Hustey FM, Meldon SW, Smith MD, Lex CK. The effect of mental status screening on the care of elderly emergency department patients. Ann Emerg Med. 2003 May;41(5):678-84. doi: 10.1067/mem.2003.152.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 12712035 (View on PubMed)

Wilber ST, Carpenter CR, Hustey FM. The Six-Item Screener to detect cognitive impairment in older emergency department patients. Acad Emerg Med. 2008 Jul;15(7):613-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2008.00158.x.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 18691212 (View on PubMed)

Han JH, Zimmerman EE, Cutler N, Schnelle J, Morandi A, Dittus RS, Storrow AB, Ely EW. Delirium in older emergency department patients: recognition, risk factors, and psychomotor subtypes. Acad Emerg Med. 2009 Mar;16(3):193-200. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2008.00339.x. Epub 2009 Jan 20.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 19154565 (View on PubMed)

Carpenter CR, Bassett ER, Fischer GM, Shirshekan J, Galvin JE, Morris JC. Four sensitive screening tools to detect cognitive dysfunction in geriatric emergency department patients: brief Alzheimer's Screen, Short Blessed Test, Ottawa 3DY, and the caregiver-completed AD8. Acad Emerg Med. 2011 Apr;18(4):374-84. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2011.01040.x.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 21496140 (View on PubMed)

Inouye SK, van Dyck CH, Alessi CA, Balkin S, Siegal AP, Horwitz RI. Clarifying confusion: the confusion assessment method. A new method for detection of delirium. Ann Intern Med. 1990 Dec 15;113(12):941-8. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-113-12-941.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 2240918 (View on PubMed)

McCusker J, Cole MG, Dendukuri N, Belzile E. The delirium index, a measure of the severity of delirium: new findings on reliability, validity, and responsiveness. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2004 Oct;52(10):1744-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2004.52471.x.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 15450055 (View on PubMed)

Sylvestre MP, McCusker J, Cole M, Regeasse A, Belzile E, Abrahamowicz M. Classification of patterns of delirium severity scores over time in an elderly population. Int Psychogeriatr. 2006 Dec;18(4):667-80. doi: 10.1017/S1041610206003334. Epub 2006 Apr 27.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 16640798 (View on PubMed)

Zou Y, Cole MG, Primeau FJ, McCusker J, Bellavance F, Laplante J. Detection and diagnosis of delirium in the elderly: psychiatrist diagnosis, confusion assessment method, or consensus diagnosis? Int Psychogeriatr. 1998 Sep;10(3):303-8. doi: 10.1017/s1041610298005390.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 9785149 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

269-2017

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.