University of Limerick Institutional Repository

A scoping review to map empirical evidence regarding key domains and questions in the clinical pathway of delirium in palliative care

DSpace Repository

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Lawlor, Peter G.
dc.contributor.author Rutkowski, Nicole A.
dc.contributor.author MacDonald, Alistain R.
dc.contributor.author Ansari, Mohammed T.
dc.contributor.author Lindsey, Sikora
dc.contributor.author Momoli, Franco
dc.contributor.author Kanji, Salmaan
dc.contributor.author Wright, David K.
dc.contributor.author Rosenberg, Erin
dc.contributor.author Hosie, Annmarie
dc.contributor.author Pereira, José L.
dc.contributor.author Meagher, David
dc.contributor.author Rice, Jill
dc.contributor.author Scott, John
dc.contributor.author Bush, Shirely H.
dc.date.accessioned 2019-03-06T12:52:08Z
dc.date.available 2019-03-06T12:52:08Z
dc.date.issued 2019
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10344/7660
dc.description peer-reviewed en_US
dc.description.abstract Context. Based on the clinical care pathway of delirium in palliative care (PC), a published analytic framework (AF) formulated research questions in key domains and recommended a scoping review to identify evidence gaps. Objectives. To produce a literature map for key domains of the published AF: screening, prognosis and diagnosis, management, and the health-related outcomes. Methods. A standard scoping review framework was used by an interdisciplinary study team of nurse- and physiciandelirium researchers, an information specialist, and review methodologists to conduct the review. Knowledge user engagement provided context in refining 19 AF questions. A peer-reviewed search strategy identified citations in Medline, PsycINFO, Embase, and CINAHL databases between 1980 and 2018. Two reviewers independently screened records for inclusion using explicit study eligibility criteria for the population, design, delirium diagnosis, and investigational intent. Results. Of 104 studies reporting empirical data and meeting eligibility criteria, most were conducted in patients with cancer (73.1%) and in inpatient PC units (52%). The most frequent study design was a one or more group, nonrandomized trial or cohort (67.3%). Evidence gaps were identified: delirium risk prediction; comparative effectiveness and harms of prevention, variability in delirium management across PC settings, advanced directive and substitute decision-maker input, and transition of care location; and estimating delirium reversibility. Future rigorous primary studies are required to address these gaps and preliminary concerns regarding the quality of extant literature. en_US
dc.language.iso eng en_US
dc.publisher Elsevier en_US
dc.relation.ispartofseries Journal of Pain and Symptom Management;57 (3)
dc.relation.uri https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2018.12.002
dc.subject assessment en_US
dc.subject palliative care en_US
dc.subject delirium en_US
dc.title A scoping review to map empirical evidence regarding key domains and questions in the clinical pathway of delirium in palliative care en_US
dc.type info:eu-repo/semantics/article en_US
dc.type.supercollection all_ul_research en_US
dc.type.supercollection ul_published_reviewed en_US
dc.identifier.doi 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2018.12.002
dc.contributor.sponsor Bruyère Academic Medical Organization en_US
dc.rights.accessrights info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess en_US


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search ULIR


Browse

My Account

Statistics