Objective: There is limited evidence for the efficacy of the novel dual orexin receptor antagonists (DORAs) suvorexant and lemborexant in preventing delirium. We examined the efficacy of DORAs in preventing delirium in critically ill patients at an advanced emergency and critical care center. Methods: In this retrospective observational study, patients 18 years of age or older admitted to the emergency center between July 2018 and November 2021 with hospitalization duration of at least 72 h were included. Kaplan-Meier curves were plotted and log rank tests were performed to compare between patients with and without DORA treatment. Cox regression analyses adjusting for factors associated with delirium risk were also performed. Results: Of the 633 enrolled patients, 82 were treated with suvorexant and 41 with lemborexant. Cox regression analysis showed that, without adjustment, the hazard ratios (95% CIs) for the development of delirium were 0.56 (0.36-0.86) for patients treated with suvorexant and 0.26 (0.11-0.62) for those treated with lemborexant. After adjustment for delirium risk factors, the hazard ratios (95% CIs) remained low at 0.34 (0.20-0.58) for suvorexant and 0.21 (0.08-0.52) for lemborexant. Conclusions: Both suvorexant and lemborexant may be effective in preventing delirium in critically ill adult patients in an advanced critical care center.

BackgroundDelirium has been shown to prolong the length of intensive care unit stay, hospitalization, and duration of ventilatory control, in addition to increasing the use of sedatives and increasing the medical costs. Although there have been a number of reports referring to risk factors for the development of delirium, no model has been developed to predict delirium in trauma patients at the time of admission. This study aimed to create a scoring system that predicts delirium in trauma patients.MethodsIn this single-center, retrospective, observational study, trauma patients aged 18 years and older requiring hospitalization more than 48 hours were included and divided into the development and validation cohorts. Univariate analysis was performed in the development cohort to identify factors significantly associated with prediction of delirium. The final scoring system for predicting delirium was developed using multivariate analysis and internal validation was performed.ResultsOf the 308 patients in the development cohort, 91 developed delirium. Clinical Frailty Score, fibrin/fibrinogen degradation products, low body mass index, lactate level, and Glasgow Coma Scale score were independently associated with the development of delirium. We developed a scoring system using these factors and calculated the delirium predictive score, which had an area under the curve of 0.85. In the validation cohort, 46 of 206 patients developed delirium. The area under the curve for the validation cohort was 0.86, and the calibration plot analysis revealed the scoring system was well calibrated in the validation cohort.DiscussionThis scoring system for predicting delirium in trauma patients consists of only five risk factors. Delirium prediction at the time of admission may be useful in clinical practice.Level of evidencePrognostic and epidemiological, level III.

Background The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 Omicron variant has a low rate of serious illness, is highly contagious, and has spread rapidly since January 2022. The number of severe cases and deaths remains problematic. Here, we aimed to elucidate the coagulation pathology of Omicron‐infected patients using rotational thromboelastometry. Methods Patients with coronavirus disease 2019, hospitalized and treated from January 2021 to April 2022, were included. The Alpha–Delta and Omicron groups were defined during admission. Blood tests, clinical course, and rotational thromboelastometry measurements were compared using a propensity score‐matched cohort. Results Both groups had 21 patients each. Lactate dehydrogenase (Alpha–Delta group [interquartile range] vs. Omicron group [interquartile range]; 449 [368–518] U/L vs. 241 [196–398] U/L, p = 0.01) and ferritin (1428 [1145–3061] ng/dl vs. 481 [188–881] ng/dl, p = 0.0002) levels were significantly lower in the Omicron group. In rotational thromboelastometry, the thrombus hardness indexes FIBTEM A5 (29 [23–34] mm vs. 23 [18–28] mm, p = 0.034) and maximum clot firmness (34 [27–40] mm vs. 26 [21–33] mm, p = 0.021) were significantly lower in the Omicron group, whereas the fibrinolysis index FIBTEM LI60 (98 [92–100] % vs. 100 [100–100] %, p = 0.0082) was higher. Conclusion Severe coagulation abnormalities may be less likely in Omicron‐infected patients than in those infected with the previous Alpha and Delta variants.

Background: Patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) occasionally develop respiratory failure and coagulopathy. We aimed to determine whether coagulation abnormalities at admission and during the course of hospitalization can predict the liberation from respiratory support in critically ill patients with COVID-19 by combining the results of rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM) with standard laboratory tests.Methods: This single-center, retrospective, observational study included 31 consecutive adult patients with COVID-19 who were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) and who required respiratory support between April 2021 and August 2021. We divided the patients into two groups according to the liberation from respiratory support and analyzed the differences between the groups.Results: There were 20 patients in the liberation group and 11 in the non-liberation group. There were no significant differences in the overt disseminated intravascular coagulation scores or abnormal counts in the ROTEM parameters at admission between groups, although there was a significant difference in the highest score in the ICU. The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment and sepsis-induced coagulopathy scores were significantly different between both groups at admission and at the time when the highest values were reported during the ICU stay.Conclusions: High sepsis-induced coagulopathy scores at admission to the ICU were found to be useful predictors of difficulties in the liberation from respiratory support in patients with severe COVID-19.However, increased overt disseminated intravascular coagulation scores and abnormal counts in the ROTEM parameters during the ICU stay were associated with difficulties in the liberation from respiratory support.

To conduct an appropriate medical interview, education and clinical experience are necessary. The usefulness of computer-based medical diagnostic support systems has been reported in medical interviewing. However, only a few reports have actually applied these systems and noted changes in the quality of the medical interview of residents. We aimed to examine how the use of a medical interview support application changes the medical interviews of residents. The study was conducted on 15 residents (with less than two years post-graduation) and ran from November 2020 to March 2021. Faculty members played the role of simulated patients in 20 cases, and the residents conducted the medical interviews. In 10 of the 20 cases, a medical interview support application was used. After the interview, the residents were asked to list up to 10 differential diseases; the interview was considered appropriate if it included the disease portrayed by the simulated patient. Furthermore, the duration of the medical interview, the number of questions asked, and changes in stress parameters were evaluated. The use of a medical interview support application increased the percentage of appropriate medical interviews. Considering the frequency, the use of a medical interview support application increased the rate of appropriate medical interviews in the rare disease group, as well as the number of questions and duration of the interviews. No stress reduction was observed. The medical interview support application may be a useful tool in identifying appropriate differential diseases during medical interviews by residents.