A national survey of the mangement of delirium in UK intensive care units

Background: Delirium is an acute organ dysfunction common amongst patients treated in intensive care units. The associated morbidity and mortality are known to be substantial. Previous surveys have described which screening tools are used to diagnose delirium and which medications are used to treat delirium, but these data are not available for the United Kingdom. Aim: This survey aimed to describe the UK management of delirium by consultant intensivists. Additionally, knowledge and attitudes towards management of delirium were sought. The results will inform future research in this area. Methods: A national postal survey of members of the UK Intensive Care Society was performed. A concise two page questionnaire survey was sent, with a second round of surveys sent to non-respondents after 6 weeks. The questionnaire was in tick-box format. Results: Six hundred and eighty-one replies were received from 1308 questionnaires sent, giving a response rate of 52%. Twenty-five percent of respondents routinely screen for delirium, but of these only 55% use a screening tool validated for use in intensive care. The majority (80%) of those using a validated instrument used the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit. Hyperactive delirium is treated pharmacologically by 95%; hypoactive delirium is treated pharmacologically by 25%, with haloperidol the most common agent used in both. Over 80% of respondents agreed that delirium prolongs mechanical ventilation and hospital stay and requires active treatment. Conclusions: This UK survey demonstrates screening for delirium is sporadic. Pharmacological treatment is usually with haloperidol in spite of the limited evidence to support this practice. Hypoactive delirium is infrequently treated pharmacologically.

Developing a methodology for the National Frog Survey of Ireland: a pilot study in Co. Mayo.

A National Frog Survey of Ireland is planned for spring 2011. We conducted a pilot survey of 25 water bodies in ten 0.25 km2 survey squares in Co. Mayo during spring 2010. Drainage ditches were the most commonly available site for breeding and, generally, two 100 m stretches of ditch were surveyed in each square. The restricted period for peak spawning activity renders any methodology utilizing only one site visit inherently risky. Consequently, each site was visited three times from late March to early April. Occurrence of spawn declined significantly from 72 % to 44 % between the first and third visit whilst the overall occurrence of spawn at all sites was 76 %. As the breeding season advanced, spawn either hatched or was predated and, therefore, disappeared. In those water bodies where spawning was late, however, greater densities of spawn were deposited than in those sites where breeding was early. Consequently, spawn density and estimated frog density did not differ significantly between site visits. Future surveys should nevertheless include multiple site visits to avoid biased estimation of species occurrence and distribution. Ecological succession was identified as the main threat present at 44 % of sites.