Etiologies of Delirium in Consecutive COVID-19 Inpatients and the Relationship Between Severity of Delirium and COVID-19 in a Prospective Study With Follow-Up
Publication: The Journal of Neuropsychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences
Abstract
Objective:
The investigators aimed to describe delirium etiologies and clinical characteristics, as well as the relationship between COVID-19 and delirium severities, at baseline and follow-up after delirium improvement among patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Methods:
A longitudinal study of 20 consecutive critically ill, delirious COVID-19 inpatients, assessed with the Charlson Comorbidity Index–Short Form (CCI-SF), COVID-19 Clinical Severity Scale (CCSS), Delirium Etiology Checklist, Delirium Motor Subtype Scale–4, and Delirium Diagnostic Tool–Provisional (DDT-Pro), was conducted. Correlational analysis of delirium severity (DDT-Pro) with each measure of clinical severity (CCI-SF and CCSS) and comparison of baseline DDT-Pro scores between patients who were living and those who were deceased at follow-up were conducted.
Results:
Participants were 50–90 years old (male, 75%; hypertension, 60%). The prevalence of preexisting medical comorbidities (CCI-SF) was low and not correlated with delirium severity (p=0.193). Eighteen patients were on mechanical or high-flow noninvasive ventilation at baseline in the intensive care unit (ICU; CCSS scores 2–4). Delirium severity (DDT-Pro scores 0–6) correlated with COVID-19 severity (0.459, p=0.021). Delirium motor subtype was hyperactive in 75% of patients. There were three to four etiologies for delirium in each patient, most commonly organ insufficiency (100%), systemic infection (100%), and metabolic and endocrine disturbances (95%). The baseline DDT-Pro score was ≤4 for five (25%) patients who died before the final assessment, with a trend of being lower than that for survivors (χ2=3.398, p=0.065).
Conclusions:
Among inpatients with COVID-19, at least three different etiological categories were identified for delirium. ICU staff treating patients with severe cases of COVID-19 should anticipate a greater severity of delirium. Although multivariate analyses with larger study samples are needed, more severe delirium may herald greater risk of death among COVID-19 patients.
Delirium is an acute impairment of consciousness that affects all higher cerebral-cortical functions and is common in seriously medically ill patients, with reported incidence rates between 4% and 55% among patients in intensive care units (ICUs) (1). Increasingly recognized as commonly occurring during the COVID-19 pandemic (2), delirium has a higher prevalence than other conditions affecting the central nervous system (CNS) when compared with stroke, encephalitis, convulsions, or meningitis (3).
Most patients with COVID-19, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, have respiratory symptoms and complications. SARS-CoV-2 enters the body via the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 receptor present in epithelial or endothelial cells from respiratory and gastrointestinal systems, blood vessels, kidneys, heart, liver, and brain, among other organs; therefore, it has the potential to directly affect all of these tissues (4). The virus also triggers an inflammatory response, humoral and cellular, with some patients developing an exaggerated response as a cytokine storm or autoimmune reaction (5). Patients with severe infection develop systemic coagulopathy, with risk of thromboembolism and D-dimer elevation (6). Hypertension, obesity, diabetes, and other cardiovascular risk factors are associated with increased severity of COVID-19 (7).
Delirium in patients with COVID-19 has many possible etiologies, including metabolic, respiratory, and coagulation alterations that are consequences of the direct effects of SARS-CoV-2 on peripheral organs and systems. Additionally, systemic inflammation that alters the blood-brain barrier leads to a CNS immune response (8). The virus produces a direct effect in the brain in a minority of cases (encephalitis and meningitis), such that delirium could result from a CNS infection (9, 10) as well as brain inflammation.
There are limited reports on delirium during the COVID-19 pandemic, mostly case reports (11–13) or retrospective studies (3, 14), although one prospective study of two ICU cohorts in France reported a 79.5% incidence rate of delirium using the Confusion Assessment Method–ICU (CAM-ICU) (9). COVID-19 delirium often presents as the hyperactive motor subtype in up to 69% of patients (9, 12), although the hypoactive subtype may be more common in the elderly (11, 14). EEGs have shown generalized slowing consistent with delirium (15). Neuroimaging has most often found microhemorrhage with a predilection for the splenium in 60% of patients, acute and subacute infarcts in 25%, and watershed white matter hyperintensities in 20% (3).
Medications used to manage delirium in patients with COVID-19 have included haloperidol and other antipsychotics, with melatonin as prophylaxis. Drugs used to manage hyperactivity have included haloperidol, dexmedetomidine, clonidine, trazadone, benzodiazepines, and valproic acid (12, 16, 17). Opioids are used in ICUs to manage pain and respiratory distress, although these are also deliriogenic, as are benzodiazepines. Dexmedetomidine may be associated with a lower risk of delirium than other sedating medications used in the ICU, such as propofol (18, 19).
To our knowledge, no reports have examined the relationship between COVID-19 disease status severity and delirium severity or a systematic clinical assessment of the relationship of etiologies with delirium in a consecutive cohort. Because delirium almost always has multifactorial precipitants, we anticipate multiple etiologies for delirium in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.
In the present study, we aimed to describe the etiologies, clinical features, and COVID-19 and delirium severities in a prospective series of consecutive delirious COVID-19 patients assessed using standardized tools by a delirium expert liaison psychiatrist working in an ICU. Assessment tools included the Delirium Etiology Checklist (DEC), DSM-5 criteria, Delirium Motor Subtype Scale–4 (DMSS-4), Delirium Diagnostic Tool–Provisional (DDT-Pro), and COVID-19 Clinical Severity Scale (CCSS). Here, we report etiologies for delirium and the relationship between COVID-19 and delirium severities at baseline and follow-up after delirium improvement.
Methods
Design, Eligibility Criteria, Participants, and Ethics
This is a prospective longitudinal study of the first 20 consecutive adult inpatients with SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19 disease) who had delirium diagnosed by the Liaison Psychiatry Service at Clinica Universitaria Bolivariana in Medellín, Colombia (CUB).
SARS-CoV-2 infections were diagnosed in CUB using the Charité/Berlin (World Health Organization) protocol of real-time RNA reverse-transcription into DNA with polymerase chain reaction of E and RdRp genes. According to the laboratory, the protocol sensitivity is 95% when assayed in SARS coronavirus virions, and no false positives in clinical samples pretested positive for other respiratory viruses (20). According to the CUB protocol, samples for diagnosis were obtained from nasopharyngeal swab in all 20 cases.
Delirium diagnosis was made according to DSM-5 criteria (21); delirium severity was assessed with the DDT-Pro (22, 23) and etiologies tabulated with the DEC (24). COVID-19 severity was measured with the CCSS (25, 26).
Demographic and medical information were obtained from medical records. The study was approved by our institution’s ethics committee (Comité de Ética de Investigación en Salud de la Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana, Medellín, Colombia), and permission for gathering information from electronic charts was obtained from the CUB research committee.
Instruments
Relevant demographic and clinical variables were collected using a standard method. Clinical variables included medical diagnoses, medications, preexisting dementia diagnosis, and death at follow-up.
Charlson Comorbidity Index–Short Form (CCI-SF).
The CCI-SF quantifies the severity of baseline medical status on a scale from 0 to 1 (no medical comorbidity) to 10 (maximum comorbidity) points, where a score of 2 indicates low comorbidity and ≥3 indicates high comorbidity. CCI-SF assesses eight health conditions; each of the first six adds one point and the last two each add two points. The conditions are stroke, diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, congestive heart failure and ischemic heart disease, dementia, peripheral artery disease, chronic kidney failure, and cancer (27).
CCSS.
The CCSS is an ordinal scale to grade clinical status of COVID-19 patients by the following seven levels: death; hospitalized, on invasive mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation; hospitalized, on noninvasive ventilation or high-flow oxygen devices; hospitalized, requiring low-flow supplemental oxygen; hospitalized, not requiring supplemental oxygen, requiring ongoing medical care (COVID-19 related or otherwise); hospitalized, not requiring supplemental oxygen, no longer requires ongoing medical care; not hospitalized (25, 26).
DDT-Pro.
The DDT-Pro is a three-item brief structured scale for provisional diagnosis and severity of delirium, which can be administered by any health care professional; it has been validated in traumatic brain injury and medical-surgical samples (22, 23). It contains structured and quantitatively scored items for evaluating vigilance (item 1) and comprehension (item 2) adapted from the Cognitive Test for Delirium (CTD) (28) that are assessed directly through patient performance without needing verbal responses (useful in mechanically ventilated patients), and sleep-wake cycle disturbance (item 3), a descriptively anchored item from the Delirium Rating Scale–Revised–98 (DRS-R-98) (29), rated using all sources of clinical information for the preceding 12–24 hours. Item 3 rating values were reversed to align with the scoring for the CTD items. These items represent symptoms from each of the three core domains that are characteristic of delirium (cognitive, higher-level thinking, and circadian) (22, 23, 30). Total DDT-Pro scores range from 9 points (best) to 0 (worst), where each item is scored 0–3. The best cutoff for diagnosing delirium is a DDT-Pro score ≤6, with scores ranging from 7 to 9 indicating nondelirium (22, 23). It has two alternate equivalent forms, A and B, for items 1 and 2. The tool was used in this study to quantify delirium severity in patients diagnosed by the liaison psychiatrist.
DEC.
The DEC is a two-part structured tool to determine the attribution of etiologies to an episode of delirium according to 13 categories, including metabolic, infection, primary CNS disorders, systemic disturbances that affect cerebral function, and drug or toxin exposure (including intoxication and withdrawal) (24). The DEC has a worksheet to capture the specific medical, surgical, and pharmacological conditions that are present and a rating table to systematically rate each etiology category for its degree of likelihood for causing delirium based on overall clinical evaluation of a patient using all sources of laboratory and medical information. The ratings are as follows: definite cause; likely cause; present and possibly contributory; present but apparently not contributory; and ruled out, not present, or not relevant.
Procedures
A liaison psychiatrist assessed, diagnosed, and managed delirium treatment for all SARS-CoV-2 positively tested patients included in this report, usually within a day (range 0–48 hours) after referral by the primary attending physician who suspected delirium. The liaison psychiatrist works closely as part of the team with the attending physicians, who are also trained in clinical delirium detection. Delirium diagnosis was made by the psychiatrist according to DSM-5 criteria (21), and motor subtypes were determined according to the DMSS-4 as hyperactive, hypoactive, or mixed (31). The psychiatrist had access to all available information sources and discussed patients’ clinical status with the team; therefore, diagnostic and therapeutic decisions regarding delirium were taken after considering clinical characteristics of each patient.
Preexisting dementia was diagnosed clinically using all available sources (patients, caregivers, and families interviewed by phone if needed; clinical charts; neuroimages). The DEC was completed at baseline visit. The DDT-Pro and CCSS were performed at the first and final psychiatric assessment when delirium had been clinically improved for at least 1 day after stabilization of clinical status, transfer to general ward, or delirium medication down-titration. Patients were followed daily by the liaison psychiatrist for routine delirium management, including psychopharmacological, after the baseline assessment until clinical complications and delirium were resolved.
Statistical Analysis
An SPSS 23.0 database was created. Discrete variables are reported by absolute and relative frequencies (percentages). According to Shapiro-Wilks test, age was normally distributed and is reported with means and standard deviations; the other continuous variables are reported by medians and interquartile ranges. Finally, we performed some exploratory analyses using Spearman’s rho correlations (one-tailed p values) for delirium severity with the DDT-Pro, CCI-SF for baseline medical burden, and CCSS for current COVID-19 status; and mean ranks comparison for baseline DDT-Pro between those who died at follow-up and those alive at last assessment. Significance values were set at p<0.05.
Results
Table 1 shows baseline patient characteristics; 75% were male and age ranged from 50 to 90 years. Prevalence of dementia and preexisting comorbid conditions was low. The CCI-SF score was ≤2 in 19 (95%) patients, without a meaningful correlation with the DDT-Pro (ρ=0.205, p=0.193) or CCSS (ρ=–0.016, p=0.474). Twelve patients (60%) were hypertensive and five (25%) had diabetes.
| Characteristic | N | % |
|---|---|---|
| Age (years) (mean±SD) | 67.8 | 10.5 |
| Charlson Comorbidity Index–Short Form (median and interquartile range) | 1 | 1 |
| Frequency | ||
| Facility | ||
| Intensive care unit | 18 | 90 |
| Internal medicine ward | 2 | 10 |
| Male | 15 | 75 |
| Main admission diagnosis | ||
| SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia | 10 | 50 |
| SARS-CoV-2 plus bacterial pneumonia | 6 | 30 |
| SARS-CoV-2 infection | 3 | 15 |
| Urinary tract infection, bacterial | 1 | 5 |
| Second main admission diagnosis | ||
| Acute respiratory distress syndrome | 9 | 45 |
| Acute respiratory failure | 5 | 25 |
| SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia | 1 | 5 |
| Bacterial pneumonia | 1 | 5 |
| Decompensated chronic obstructive pulmonary disease | 1 | 5 |
| Pneumothorax | 1 | 5 |
| Sepsis, bacterial | 1 | 5 |
| Urinary tract infection, bacterial | 1 | 5 |
| Third main admission diagnosis | ||
| Acute kidney failure | 6 | 30 |
| None | 6 | 30 |
| Bacterial sepsis | 2 | 10 |
| Others diagnoses with frequency | 6 | 30 |
| Status according to COVID-19 Clinical Severity Scale scoreb | ||
| 2=Hospitalized, on invasive mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation | 11 | 55 |
| 3=Hospitalized, on noninvasive ventilation or high-flow oxygen devices | 6 | 30 |
| 4=Hospitalized, requiring low-flow supplemental oxygen | 3 | 15 |
| D-dimer elevation (normal <500 ng/mL) | 13 | 65 |
| Treatment related to SARS-CoV-2 infection | ||
| Any corticosteroid | 18 | 90 |
| Any antiviral | 0 | 0 |
| Hypertension | 12 | 60 |
| Diabetes | 5 | 25 |
| Cancer | 0 | 0 |
| Dementia | 2 | 10 |
| Medication | ||
| Any anticholinergic | 18 | 90 |
| Midazolam or any other benzodiazepine | 16 | 80 |
| Any antipsychotic | 20 | 100 |
| Dexmedetomidine | 10 | 50 |
| Fentanyl or any other opiate | 17 | 85 |
| Any NSAID | 12 | 60 |
| Any antibiotic | 18 | 90 |
| Any other psychoactive | 13 | 65 |
| Delirium characteristic | ||
| Delirium motor subtype | ||
| Hyperactive | 15 | 75 |
| Hypoactive | 3 | 15 |
| Mixed | 1 | 5 |
| No subtype | 1 | 5 |
| Presence of hallucinations/hallucinatory behavior | 3 | 15 |
| Presence of delusions or suspiciousness | 1 | 5 |
| Psychotic symptoms not assessable | 18 | 90 |
| DDT-Pro score (range 0–9; median and interquartile range) | 2.5 | 5 |
a
DDT-Pro=Delirium Diagnostic Tool–Provisional; NSAID=nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.
b
COVID-19 Clinical Severity Scale scores: 1=death; 2=hospitalized, on invasive mechanical ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation; 3=hospitalized, on noninvasive ventilation or high-flow oxygen devices; 4=hospitalized, requiring low-flow supplemental oxygen; 5=hospitalized, not requiring supplemental oxygen, requiring ongoing medical care (COVID-19-related or otherwise); 6=hospitalized, not requiring supplemental oxygen, no longer requires ongoing medical care; and 7=not hospitalized.
All or nearly all patients were treated with corticosteroids, anticholinergics, benzodiazepines, and opiates (including fentanyl); half received dexmedetomidine as part of their medical management in the ICU. None received antivirals.
All except two patients were in the ICU during the baseline assessment and on invasive mechanical or high-flow noninvasive ventilation (CCSS scores of 2–4). At baseline, DDT-Pro delirium severity correlated significantly with the severity of COVID-19 on the CCSS (ρ=0.459, p=0.021).
Nearly all patients had a definite likelihood for delirium etiology. The most common definite or likely causes or possibly contributory etiologies were organ insufficiency (100%), systemic infection (100%), and metabolic and endocrine disturbances (95%) (Table 2). All had between three and four delirium etiologies (from definite to possible contributors); the most common combinations were metabolic and endocrine plus systemic infection plus organ insufficiency (85%) and metabolic and endocrine plus systemic infection plus organ insufficiency plus any other CNS disorder or any other diverse cause (10%). The “any other” CNS etiologies were all preexisting chronic conditions related to cognitive or motor impairment.
| Present and possibly contributory | Present but apparently not contributory | Ruled out, not present, or not relevant | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Definite cause | Likely cause | |||||||||
| Category | N | % | N | % | N | % | N | % | N | % |
| Drug intoxication | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 100 |
| Drug withdrawal | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 100 |
| Metabolic and endocrine disturbance | 3 | 15 | 13 | 65 | 3 | 15 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 5 |
| Traumatic brain injury | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 100 |
| Seizures | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 100 |
| Infection | ||||||||||
| Intracranial | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 100 |
| Systemic | 18 | 90 | 2 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Neoplasm | ||||||||||
| Intracranial | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 100 |
| Systemic | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 100 |
| Cerebrovascular | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 100 |
| Organ insufficiency | 19 | 95 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Other central nervous system disordera | 0 | 0 | 2 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 17 | 85 |
| Other causesb | 0 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 19 | 95 |
a
Traumatic brain injury antecedent with cognitive or motor impairment (N=1), schizophrenia and degenerative dementia (N=1), and degenerative dementia (N=1).
b
Postoperative (tracheostomy).
According to the DEC worksheet (could have >1 specific condition present in a given category), organ insufficiencies related to delirium were pulmonary (95%), renal (35%), cardiac (10%), and hepatic (5%). Systemic infections related to delirium were viral (85%), followed by a variety of bacterial causes and complications (75%). Metabolic and endocrine etiologies were a variety of acid-base and electrolyte disorders (100%), anemia (60%), hyperglycemia (40%), and hypoalbuminemia (30%).
Delirium characteristics and severity, where 75% of patients had hyperactive motor subtype, are presented in Table 1. Three (15%) patients had hallucinations; although it was difficult to assess thought content because of oral communication restrictions, one (5%) who did not have hallucinations did have delusions or suspiciousness. The DDT-Pro score range at baseline assessment was 0–6, with eight (40%) patients scoring 0 or 1.
Nonpharmacological therapeutic measures for delirium were applied for all patients, although their isolation needs and biosecurity measures precluded direct family involvement in their care and constricted the interaction between patients and staff. Nonetheless, standard of care included the following: restriction of invasive procedures (central and peripheral lines), hydration assessment, noise control, use of glasses and hearing aids when possible, preservation of environmental cues of day and night as much as possible, reorientation, explanation of procedures, pictures and recorded messages from the family when available, and communication between the staff and the family members and home caregivers.
All patients received antipsychotics as first options for delirium treatment (haloperidol 5–20 mg/day [except 1 mg for patients with hypoactive subtype or no motor subtype], N=16 [80%]; quetiapine 50–600 mg/day, N=4 [20%]). Quetiapine was chosen if there was a history of extrapyramidal adverse events when using typical antipsychotics or for its hypnotic effect administered at night. Three patients had an inadequate response to haloperidol; it was changed to quetiapine in two (12.5%) and levomepromazine 25 mg/day in one (6.2%). Adjunctive trazodone 50–100 mg q.h.s. was added in eight out of 20 (40%) patients for sleep and nocturnal activity regulation.
Median psychiatry follow-up time was 9 days (interquartile range=22) with a range of 3–49. Figure 1 shows rating levels for CCSS and DDT-Pro at baseline (N=20), where CCSS scores are severe stages and DDT-Pro scores indicate severe delirium. At the final assessment (N=15) scores were improved for both scales. Five patients (25%) died before the final DDT-Pro assessment, representing CCSS=1. Final DDT-Pro scores ranged from 6 to 9, and 46.7% of patients received a score of 8. Final CCSS scores correlated significantly with DDT-Pro for survivors (0.567, p=0.028).
FIGURE 1. Rating levels for COVID-19 Clinical Severity Scale (CCSS) and Delirium Diagnostic Tool–Provisional (DDT-Pro) scores at baseline and the final liaison psychiatry assessment among consecutive inpatients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 and delirium (N=20)
a The graphs show the frequency of specific scores for the CCSS (range from 1=death to 7=not hospitalized) and DDT-Pro (delirium with decreasing severity as scores go from 0 to 6 and no delirium from 7 to 9) at the baseline psychiatric assessment and the final psychiatric assessment (two bars at the right) for 20 patients (living, N=15; deceased, N=5 [denoted in black]). Ratings for the five deceased patients were not assessable on the DDT-Pro. Scores were worse on the CCSS and DDT-Pro (in the delirium range) at baseline, while scores on both measures were improved at the final assessment. For a color version of the figure, see the online edition of this article.
The baseline median DDT-Pro score in the 5 patients who died was 1 (interquartile range=4), versus 3 (interquartile range=6) in the 15 survivors (p=0.266). Because the baseline DDT-Pro score in those who died ranged between 0 and 4, we performed a posterior likelihood ratio chi-square test to explore whether the DDT-Pro score ≤4 at baseline was related to mortality (likelihood ratio χ2=3.398; df=1, p=0.065).
Because a p value of 0.065 is close to the significance threshold and death is a critically important outcome, we calculated significance values for the first 10 and then first 15 patients of the study (p=0.201 and p=0.095 respectively), finding a trend toward significance for a relationship with mortality among patients scoring ≤4 on the DDT-Pro as the sample size increased.
No survivor at final assessment required mechanical ventilation or high-flow oxygen support; rather, most were on supplementary low-flow oxygen and hospital medical care (CCSS levels 4 and 5), and all had DDT-Pro scores between 6 and 9. Four of the five patients who died had baseline CCSS=2 (on mechanical ventilation) scores.
Discussion
Given the paucity of prospective delirium studies during the COVID-19 pandemic using standardized tools designed for delirium and administered by delirium expert psychiatrists, we conducted a longitudinal study of 20 inpatients with COVID-19 who met DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for delirium in an academic hospital in Medellín, Colombia, 18 of whom were in an ICU at baseline. These patients were assessed by a liaison psychiatrist expert in both clinical and research delirium evaluation and medication treatment, who managed the patients clinically during the study period until either death or the final evaluation for improved delirium.
Most patients were male, and more than half had chronic hypertension, both recognized risk factors for severe COVID-19 (7). Surprisingly, baseline preexisting medical problems rated using the CCI-SF did not correlate with delirium or COVID-19 severity. However, there was a correlation between greater severities of COVID-19 (CCSS) and delirium (DDT-Pro) at baseline (p=0.021) and final assessment (p=0.028). Although the CAM-ICU does not measure severity, CAM-ICU delirium in COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome was associated with longer mechanical ventilation time and ICU length of stay (9). Thus, there appears to be a relationship between delirium and COVID-19 disease burden.
Delirium is common in COVID-19; however, our objective was not to determine incidence but rather to describe the clinical characteristics of delirium and their relationship to etiologies and medical severity. The delirium incidence rate among ICU patients with COVID-19 was reported at 79.5%, based on the CAM-ICU being positive at any time during the hospital stay, and 18% on admission (9).
Kotfis et al. (8) described the possible causes for delirium in seven categories: direct CNS invasion, induction of CNS inflammatory mediators, secondary effect of other organ system failure, effect of sedative strategies, prolonged mechanical ventilation time, immobilization, and other needed but unfortunate environmental factors, including social isolation and quarantine without family.
We ascertained etiologies of delirium using the DEC, which attributes the likelihood of pathophysiological causes of delirium using all sources of information from laboratory and medical records, and found that in almost all patients organ insufficiencies (not only pulmonary) and systemic infection were definite causes of delirium; all had at least three other serious medical problems implicated for causing delirium, including metabolic and endocrine disturbances.
Pathophysiological mechanisms for delirium in COVID-19 are many. Inflammatory response to systemic infections alters the blood-brain barrier, allowing a central inflammatory response leading to neuronal dysfunction of cholinergic circuits, among other alterations (32). Pulmonary, cardiac, and renal insufficiency reduce CNS mitochondrial oxidation, increase CNS dopamine, and decrease acetylcholine production (33). Hepatic insufficiency increases tyrosine, phenylalanine, and tryptophan levels, leading to increase of CNS dopamine and serotonin (34). Among metabolic and endocrine perturbations, electrolyte disturbance and anemia alter CNS oxidative metabolism (35, 36), and hyperglycemia causes direct brain insult and increases neuronal depolarization (37). The neural circuits altered as a result of these etiologies are related to delirium and involve the reticular activating system and thalamus and their connections to the neocortex, including parietal and frontal lobes (38, 39).
There were no cases of delirium attributable to direct brain pathology, such as stroke, encephalitis, or meningitis. These seem less common in COVID-19 patients when compared with peripheral pathologies (3, 9, 10).
Kotfis et al. (8) recommended that delirium presence should be actively screened for during COVID-19 using dedicated psychometric tools. These include the brief screening tools CAM-ICU and ICSDC used by nurses; delirium severity should be checked using the well-validated Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98 (DRS-R98) (8). We used the DDT-Pro, a simple, highly structured three-item tool derived from the DRS-R98 and CTD to assess severity of symptoms representative of the three core domains of delirium. Circadian core domain (sleep-wake cycle) is not assessed by the CAM-ICU. The DDT-Pro is highly correlated with the DRS-R98 score (r=0.913) (22) and is sensitive to change in delirium severity at follow-up (23). The DDT-Pro may be administered by any clinical staff member for delirium diagnosis and severity; its cutoff score ≤6 has 88%–90% sensitivity and 85%–87% specificity for an independent DSM-5 delirium diagnosis when administered by a physician or nurse to geriatric inpatients (23).
DDT-Pro score did not correlate with baseline medical burden (CCI-SF) in our sample, where almost all patients had ≤2 premorbid conditions and low dementia prevalence. However, according to our exploratory analysis, staff treating more severe COVID-19 patients should anticipate more severe delirium (Figure 1), even in patients with a low number of preexisting medical comorbidities. Although nonsignificant, the DDT-Pro score at baseline among the five (25%) patients who died was lower than that of the 15 (75%) who survived, and there was a trend for those scoring ≤4 to have increased frequency of death during the follow-up, suggesting a predictive relationship for mortality with more severe delirium in COVID-19.
According to the DMSS-4, 80% of our patients had hyperactive subtype or mixed motor subtype delirium, which is consistent with the reported high prevalence of the Richmond Agitation–Sedation Scale +3 and +4 scores (very agitated and combative) (9). We found that at least 20% of the sample had hallucinations or delusions and suspiciousness. These findings indicate that patients with COVID-19 are more disruptive, cause more stress among staff members, and need more pharmacological interventions. The use of nonpharmacological measures for delirium management is possible but restricted due to patient biosafety isolation needs and limitations on staff availability.
Well-designed clinical trials of delirium treatment for COVID-19 patients are lacking, and our study is not a clinical trial; rather, it is a descriptive study of routine clinical care. The use of antipsychotics for reducing delirium severity or incidence is common in clinical practice by psychiatrists, and they are generally well tolerated, as supported by clinical trials (40–42). Additionally, metanalysis supports the efficacy and safety of haloperidol (as the first pharmacological option) and quetiapine, the two agents most frequently used in our sample (43). Decades of experience also support the safe use of antipsychotics in the ICU, and their safety was corroborated by a recent systematic review (44). Recommendations based on case reports of COVID-19 patients indicate the use of antipsychotics for delirium treatment as a result of their blocking effect of dopamine excess and rebalancing of the cholinergic deficiency in delirium, such as for thalamic sensorimotor gating (12, 24, 33, 38).
Although all patients in our cohort received antipsychotics for delirium, almost half required the addition of trazodone for sedation; 15% needed an antipsychotic change to a more sedating option due to insufficient response to haloperidol. Delirium pharmacological management in the ICU is complicated by the deliriogenic effects of intoxication or emergence withdrawal from sedation and pain medications commonly used in the ICU setting (45, 46). Nearly all of our patients received drugs known to be deliriogenic as part of their ICU treatment regimen–corticosteroids, anticholinergics, benzodiazepines and opiates–suggesting that COVID-19 conditions were not the only etiologies for delirium. Interestingly, none of these drugs was considered a main cause of delirium on the DEC, perhaps because they were a standard of care and overshadowed by major physiological impairments. Only half received dexmedetomidine for sedation, reported to sedate with less delirium risk (18, 19, 47).
Melatonin has been reported to help maintain a normal sleep-wake rhythm in COVID-19 delirium and has possible anti-inflammatory and immune-enhancing features (48). A clinical trial using ramelteon, a melatonin receptor agonist, supported a pharmacological intervention in the circadian system for delirium prophylaxis (49). Circadian abnormalities are one of the three core symptom domains of delirium. Unfortunately, neither of these two medications are available for routine hospital use in Colombia.
Our study is limited by a small number of consecutive cases, but its strengths were the use of valid delirium-specific tools by an expert liaison psychiatrist and longitudinal follow-up. The DDT-Pro scores correlated to COVID severity at both baseline and final assessments. Although studies in larger samples are needed, more severe delirium on admission to ICU for COVID-19 may be a harbinger of mortality even in patients who did not have much preexisting medical comorbidity on the CCI-SF. Future research with larger samples using multivariate analyses is needed to study relationships of concomitant deliriogenic medications and key medical etiologies for delirium such as organ insufficiency with severity of delirium in COVID-19 patients. Patients with COVID-19 should be assessed for delirium severity.
Footnote
Dr. Trzepacz holds the copyright for the Delirium Etiology Checklist, and Drs. Trzepacz and Franco are co-owners of the copyright for the Delirium Diagnostic Tool–Provisional. Dr. Velásquez-Tirado reports no financial relationships with commercial interests.
References
1.
Rood P, Huisman-de Waal G, Vermeulen H, et al: Effect of organisational factors on the variation in incidence of delirium in intensive care unit patients: A systematic review and meta-regression analysis. Aust Crit Care 2018; 31:180–187
2.
Duggan MC, Van J, Ely EW: Delirium assessment in critically ill older adults: considerations during the COVID-19 pandemic. Crit Care Clin 2021; 37:175–190
3.
Sawlani V, Scotton S, Nader K, et al: COVID-19-related intracranial imaging findings: a large single-centre experience. Clin Radiol 2020; S0009-9260(20)30392-5 (in press) doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2020.09.002
4.
Roberts CM, Levi M, McKee M, et al: COVID-19: a complex multisystem disorder. Br J Anaesth 2020; 125:238–242
5.
Allegra A, Di Gioacchino M, Tonacci A, et al: Immunopathology of SARS-CoV-2 infection: Immune cells and mediators, prognostic factors, and immune-therapeutic implications. Int J Mol Sci 2020; 21:4782
6.
Iba T, Levy JH, Levi M, et al: Coagulopathy in COVID-19. J Thromb Haemost 2020; 18:2103–2109
7.
Guzik TJ, Mohiddin SA, Dimarco A, et al: COVID-19 and the cardiovascular system: implications for risk assessment, diagnosis, and treatment options. Cardiovasc Res 2020; 116:1666–1687
8.
Kotfis K, Williams Roberson S, Wilson JE, et al: COVID-19: ICU delirium management during SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Crit Care 2020; 24:176
9.
Helms J, Kremer S, Merdji H, et al: Delirium and encephalopathy in severe COVID-19: a cohort analysis of ICU patients. Crit Care 2020; 24:491
10.
Hosseini AA, Shetty AK, Sprigg N, et al: Delirium as a presenting feature in COVID-19: neuroinvasive infection or autoimmune encephalopathy? Brain Behav Immun 2020; 88:68–70
11.
Beach SR, Praschan NC, Hogan C, et al: Delirium in COVID-19: A case series and exploration of potential mechanisms for central nervous system involvement. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 2020; 65:47–53
12.
Sher Y, Rabkin B, Maldonado JR, et al: COVID-19–associated hyperactive intensive care unit delirium with proposed pathophysiology and treatment: a case report. Psychosomatics 2020; 61:544–550
13.
Umapathi T, Quek WMJ, Yen JM, et al: Encephalopathy in COVID-19 patients; viral, parainfectious, or both? eNeurologicalSci 2020; 21:100275
14.
Poloni TE, Carlos AF, Cairati M, et al: Prevalence and prognostic value of delirium as the initial presentation of COVID-19 in the elderly with dementia: an Italian retrospective study. EClinicalMedicine 2020; 26:100490
15.
Canham LJW, Staniaszek LE, Mortimer AM, et al: Electroencephalographic (EEG) features of encephalopathy in the setting of Covid-19: a case series. Clin Neurophysiol Pract 2020; 5:199–205
16.
Baller EB, Hogan CS, Fusunyan MA, et al: NeuroCOVID: pharmacological recommendations for delirium associated with COVID-19. Psychosomatics 2020; 61:585–596
17.
Sanders BJ, Bakar M, Mehta S, et al: Hyperactive delirium requires more aggressive management in patients with COVID-19: temporarily rethinking “low and slow”. J Pain Symptom Manage 2020; 60:e31–e32
18.
Skrobik Y, Duprey MS, Hill NS, et al: Low-dose nocturnal dexmedetomidine prevents ICU delirium: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2018; 197:1147–1156
19.
Riker RR, Shehabi Y, Bokesch PM, et al: Dexmedetomidine vs midazolam for sedation of critically ill patients: a randomized trial. JAMA 2009; 301:489–499
20.
Corman VM, Landt O, Kaiser M, et al: Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR. Euro Surveill 2020; 25:2000045
21.
American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th ed. Washington, DC, American Psychiatric Association, 2013
22.
Kean J, Trzepacz PT, Murray LL, et al: Initial validation of a brief provisional diagnostic scale for delirium. Brain Inj 2010; 24:1222–1230
23.
Franco JG, Ocampo MV, Velásquez-Tirado JD, et al: Validation of the Delirium Diagnostic Tool-Provisional (DDT-Pro) with medical inpatients and comparison with the confusion assessment method algorithm. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 2020; 32:213–226
24.
Trzepacz PT, Meagher DJ: Neuropsychiatric aspects of delirium; in American Psychiatric Publishing Textbook of Neuropsychiatry. Edited by Yudofsky SC, Hales RE. Washington, DC, American Psychiatric Association Publishing, 2008, pp 445–517
25.
Goldman JD, Lye DCB, Hui DS, et al: Remdesivir for 5 or 10 days in patients with severe COVID-19. N Engl J Med 2020; 383:1827–1837
26.
Beigel JH, Tomashek KM, Dodd LE, et al: Remdesivir for the treatment of COVID-19, final report. N Engl J Med 2020; 383:1813–1826
27.
Berkman LF, Leo-Summers L, Horwitz RI: Emotional support and survival after myocardial infarction: a prospective, population-based study of the elderly. Ann Intern Med 1992; 117:1003–1009
28.
Hart RP, Levenson JL, Sessler CN, et al: Validation of a cognitive test for delirium in medical ICU patients. Psychosomatics 1996; 37:533–546
29.
Trzepacz PT, Mittal D, Torres R, et al: Validation of the Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98: comparison with the Delirium Rating Scale and the Cognitive Test for Delirium. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 2001; 13:229–242
30.
Franco JG, Trzepacz PT, Sepúlveda E, et al: Delirium Diagnostic Tool-Provisional (DDT-Pro) scores in delirium, subsyndromal delirium and no delirium. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 2020; 67:107–114
31.
Meagher D, Adamis D, Leonard M, et al: Development of an abbreviated version of the Delirium Motor Subtyping Scale (DMSS-4). Int Psychogeriatr 2014; 26:693–702
32.
Gu M, Mei XL, Zhao YN: Sepsis and cerebral dysfunction: BBB damage, neuroinflammation, oxidative stress, apoptosis and autophagy as key mediators and the potential therapeutic approaches. Neurotox Res (Epub ahead of print, Sep 2, 2020)
33.
Trzepacz PT: Is there a final common neural pathway in delirium? Focus on acetylcholine and dopamine. Semin Clin Neuropsychiatry 2000; 5:132–148
34.
Holecek M. Ammonia and amino acid profiles in liver cirrhosis: Effects of variables leading to hepatic encephalopathy. Nutrition 2015; 31:14–20
35.
Siesjö BK: Cerebral circulation and metabolism. J Neurosurg 1984; 60:883–908
36.
Grune T, Sommerburg O, Siems WG: Oxidative stress in anemia. Clin Nephrol 2000; 53(Suppl):S18–S22
37.
Kitano Y, Kuwabara S, Misawa S, et al: The acute effects of glycemic control on axonal excitability in human diabetics. Ann Neurol 2004; 56:462–467
38.
Trzepacz PT: Update on the neuropathogenesis of delirium. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 1999; 10:330–334
39.
Maldonado JR: Delirium pathophysiology: an updated hypothesis of the etiology of acute brain failure. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 2018; 33:1428–1457
40.
Kaneko T, Cai J, Ishikura T, et al: Prophylactic consecutive administration of haloperidol can reduce the occurrence of postoperative delirium in gastrointestinal surgery. Yonago Acta Med 1999; 42:179–184
41.
Kalisvaart KJ, de Jonghe JFM, Bogaards MJ, et al: Haloperidol prophylaxis for elderly hip-surgery patients at risk for delirium: a randomized placebo-controlled study. J Am Geriatr Soc 2005; 53:1658–1666
42.
Larsen KA, Kelly SE, Stern TA, et al: Administration of olanzapine to prevent postoperative delirium in elderly joint-replacement patients: a randomized, controlled trial. Psychosomatics 2010; 51:409–418
43.
Wu YC, Tseng PT, Tu YK, et al: Association of delirium response and safety of pharmacological interventions for the management and prevention of delirium: a network meta-analysis. JAMA Psychiatry 2019; 76:526–535
44.
Nikooie R, Neufeld KJ, Oh ES, et al: Antipsychotics for treating delirium in hospitalized adults: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med 2019; 171:485–495
45.
Pisani MA, Murphy TE, Araujo KLB, et al: Benzodiazepine and opioid use and the duration of intensive care unit delirium in an older population. Crit Care Med 2009; 37:177–183
46.
Riker RR, Fraser GL: Altering intensive care sedation paradigms to improve patient outcomes. Anesthesiol Clin 2011; 29:663–674
47.
McLaughlin M, Marik PE: Dexmedetomidine and delirium in the ICU. Ann Transl Med 2016; 4:224
48.
Zambrelli E, Canevini M, Gambini O, et al: Delirium and sleep disturbances in COVID-19: a possible role for melatonin in hospitalized patients? Sleep Med 2020; 70:111
49.
Hatta K, Kishi Y, Wada K, et al: Preventive effects of ramelteon on delirium: a randomized placebo-controlled trial. JAMA Psychiatry 2014; 71:397–403
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
History
Received: 7 October 2020
Revision received: 9 December 2020
Accepted: 11 December 2020
Published online: 12 April 2021
Published in print: Summer 2021
Keywords
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Export Citations
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.
For more information or tips please see 'Downloading to a citation manager' in the Help menu.
View Options
View options
PDF/EPUB
View PDF/EPUBLogin options
Already a subscriber? Access your subscription through your login credentials or your institution for full access to this article.
Personal login Institutional Login Open Athens loginNot a subscriber?
PsychiatryOnline subscription options offer access to the DSM-5-TR® library, books, journals, CME, and patient resources. This all-in-one virtual library provides psychiatrists and mental health professionals with key resources for diagnosis, treatment, research, and professional development.
Need more help? PsychiatryOnline Customer Service may be reached by emailing [email protected] or by calling 800-368-5777 (in the U.S.) or 703-907-7322 (outside the U.S.).