Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 864

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Clinical Prediction Rule for Delirium After Elective Noncardiac Surgery

Marcantonio, Edward R.·1994·JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate a clinical prediction rule for postoperative delirium using data available to clinicians preoperatively. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: General surgery, orthopedic surgery, and gynecology services at Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Mass. PATIENTS: Consenting patients older than 50 years admitted for major elective noncardiac surgery between November 1, 1990, and March 15, 1992 (N = 1341). MEASUREMENTS: All patients underwent preoperative evaluations, including a medical history, physical examination, laboratory tests, and assessments of physical and cognitive function using the Specific Activity Scale and the Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status. Postoperative delirium was diagnosed using the Confusion Assessment Method or using data from the medical record and the hospital's nursing intensity index. Patients were followed up for the duration of hospitalization to determine major complication rates, length of stay, and discharge disposition. RESULTS: Postoperative delirium occurred in 117 (9%) of the 1341 patients studied. Independent correlates included age 70 years or older; self-reported alcohol abuse; poor cognitive status; poor functional status; markedly abnormal preoperative serum sodium, potassium, or glucose level; noncardiac thoracic surgery; and aortic aneurysm surgery. Using these seven preoperative factors, a simple predictive rule was developed. In an independent population, the rule stratified patients into groups with low (2%), medium (8%, 13%), and high (50%) rates of postoperative delirium. Patients who developed delirium had higher rates of major complications, longer lengths of stay, and higher rates of discharge to long-term care or rehabilitative facilities. CONCLUSIONS: Using data available preoperatively, clinicians can stratify patients into risk groups for the development of delirium. Since delirium is associated with a variety of adverse outcomes, patients with substantial risk for this complication could be candidates for interventions to reduce the incidence of postoperative delirium and potentially improve overall surgical outcomes.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.1994.03510260066030

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 864

Metadata

Authors
Marcantonio, E. R.
Venue
JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association
Published
1994-01-12
Volume
271
Issue
2
Pages
134
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2154365828
Cited by
864
References
2
FWCI
10.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.