Citations

Abstract Background The prevalence of delirium in intensive care units (ICUs) is high and has a major impact on patient outcomes. Aim To describe delirium assessment instruments, prevalence, interventions and barriers in delirium management in adult and paediatric ICUs; and to explore the association between delirium prevalence and reported interventions and barriers at unit level. Study Design A secondary analysis of the cross‐sectional World Delirium Awareness Day Delirium Survey on 15 March 2023. This was a prospective study to assess the one‐day point delirium prevalence, practices and quality improvement efforts across healthcare systems. Data was analysed descriptively and using multiple linear regression. Results Data of 1612 assessments in 123 ICUs from three German‐speaking countries were analysed. The most frequently used delirium assessment instrument was the Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist (43.9%, n = 54). The prevalence of delirium at 8 AM was 18.6% and at 8 PM 20.4% from the 94 ICUs included in the regression analyses. Prevalence for adult and paediatric and mixed ICUs are comparable. Main reported over all unit‐level interventions were ‘pain management’ (95.9%, n = 118), ‘mobilization’ (94.3%, n = 116) and ‘verbal re‐orientation’ (84.6%, n = 104). Main reported over all unit‐level barriers were ‘shortage of staff’ (53.7%, n = 66) and ‘patients who are difficult to assess’ (44.7%, n = 55). Interventions such as ‘avoidance of bladder tubes/catheters’ in all ICUs, ‘use of ear plugs and/or sleep glasses’ in adult ICUs and ‘mobilization’ in paediatric and mixed ICUs were associated with reduced delirium prevalence. Across all ICUs, as well as in both adult and paediatric ICUs, ‘lack of appropriate scores for delirium assessment’ was identified as a significant barrier. Conclusions One fifth of assessed ICU patients suffer from delirium. Several reported unit‐level interventions and barriers may have an impact on delirium prevalence, suggesting an approach for future studies and clinical practice. Relevance to Clinical Practice In clinical practice, unit‐level ‘avoidance of bladder tubes/catheters’, ‘use of ear plugs and/or sleep glasses’ and ‘mobilization’ may be used as delirium prevention and treatment interventions.

Abstract The International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) has updated the operational classification of epileptic seizures, building upon the framework established in 2017. This revision, informed by the implementation experience, involved a working group appointed by the ILAE Executive Committee. Comprising 37 members from all ILAE regions, the group utilized a modified Delphi process, requiring a consensus threshold of more than two thirds for any proposal. Following public comments, the Executive Committee appointed seven additional experts to the revision task force to address and incorporate the issues raised, as appropriate. The updated classification maintains four main seizure classes: Focal, Generalized, Unknown (whether focal or generalized), and Unclassified. Taxonomic rules distinguish classifiers, which are considered to reflect biological classes and directly impact clinical management, from descriptors, which indicate other important seizure characteristics. Focal seizures and those of unknown origin are further classified by the patient's state of consciousness (impaired or preserved) during the seizure, defined operationally through clinical assessment of awareness and responsiveness. If the state of consciousness is undetermined, the seizure is classified under the parent term, that is, the main seizure class (focal seizure or seizure of unknown origin). Generalized seizures are grouped into absence seizures, generalized tonic–clonic seizures, and other generalized seizures, now including recognition of negative myoclonus as a seizure type. Seizures are described in the basic version as with or without observable manifestations, whereas an expanded version utilizes the chronological sequence of seizure semiology. This updated classification comprises four main classes and 21 seizure types. Special emphasis was placed on ensuring translatability into languages beyond English. Its aim is to establish a common language for all health care professionals involved in epilepsy care, from resource‐limited areas to highly specialized centers, and to provide accessible terms for patients and caregivers.

Abstract Hereditary tumor predisposition syndromes pose a challenge for early detection and timely treatment of tumors. In von Hippel–Lindau disease, desirable personalized surveillance programs are lacking due to insufficient data on genotype-specific risk profiles of individual mutations. To describe neoplastic risk profiles for carriers of pathogenic and likely pathogenic VHL germline mutations, our observational study recruited 1,350 participants from 40 centers worldwide. 432 different VHL germline mutations were observed, with p.Asn78Ser, p.Arg161Ter, p.Arg161Gln, p.Arg167Gln, p.Arg167Trp and p.Tyr98His being the six most frequent, occurring in a total of 493 carriers (36.5%) and in ≥30 patients each. Age-related penetrance risks for retinal hemangioblastoma, central nervous system hemangioblastoma, renal cell carcinoma, pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors and pheochromocytoma/paraganglioma in carriers of the most frequent VHL mutations were assessed. In addition, the number of organs affected, the frequency of surgery and the outcome are reported. Pairwise comparisons of the age-dependent tumor penetrance of these six mutations showed that 47 out of 90 pairs were significantly different. The most significant associations were found in p.Tyr98His (n = 19), followed by p.Arg161Ter (n = 10). All pairwise comparisons of mutations affecting different codons showed at least one significant (P < 0.05) difference, except for p.Asn78Ser vs p.Arg161Ter. Thus, tumor risk varied by VHL mutation type and location, but did not differ between the truncating mutation p.Arg161Ter and the missense mutation p.Asn78Ser. Our study demonstrates the importance of mutation-specific phenotype prediction. With appropriate validation, the data have important implications for risk assessment and decision making in tumor prevention for carriers of the respective VHL mutations.