Long-Term Cognitive Impairment After Critical Illness: Original Article
Long-Term Cognitive Impairment After Critical Illness: Original Article
Long-Term Cognitive Impairment After Critical Illness: Original Article
n e w e ng l a n d j o u r na l
of
m e dic i n e
original article
A BS T R AC T
BACKGROUND
The authors full names, degrees, and affiliations are listed in the Appendix. Address
reprint requests to Dr. Pandharipande at
1211 21st Ave. S, MAB Ste. 526, Nashville,
TN 37212, or at pratik.pandharipande@
vanderbilt.edu.
*The Bringing to Light the Risk Factors and
Incidence of Neuropsychological Dysfunction in ICU Survivors (BRAIN-ICU) Study
Investigators are listed in the Supplementary Appendix, available at NEJM.org.
N Engl J Med 2013;369:1306-16.
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1301372
Copyright 2013 Massachusetts Medical Society.
Survivors of critical illness often have a prolonged and disabling form of cognitive
impairment that remains inadequately characterized.
METHODS
We enrolled adults with respiratory failure or shock in the medical or surgical intensive
care unit (ICU), evaluated them for in-hospital delirium, and assessed global cognition
and executive function 3 and 12 months after discharge with the use of the Repeatable
Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (population age-adjusted
mean [SD] score, 10015, with lower values indicating worse global cognition) and the
Trail Making Test, Part B (population age-, sex-, and education-adjusted mean score,
5010, with lower scores indicating worse executive function). Associations of the duration of delirium and the use of sedative or analgesic agents with the outcomes were
assessed with the use of linear regression, with adjustment for potential confounders.
RESULTS
Of the 821 patients enrolled, 6% had cognitive impairment at baseline, and delirium developed in 74% during the hospital stay. At 3 months, 40% of the patients had
global cognition scores that were 1.5 SD below the population means (similar to
scores for patients with moderate traumatic brain injury), and 26% had scores 2 SD
below the population means (similar to scores for patients with mild Alzheimers
disease). Deficits occurred in both older and younger patients and persisted, with
34% and 24% of all patients with assessments at 12 months that were similar to
scores for patients with moderate traumatic brain injury and scores for patients
with mild Alzheimers disease, respectively. A longer duration of delirium was independently associated with worse global cognition at 3 and 12 months (P=0.001
and P=0.04, respectively) and worse executive function at 3 and 12 months (P=0.004
and P=0.007, respectively). Use of sedative or analgesic medications was not consistently associated with cognitive impairment at 3 and 12 months.
CONCLUSIONS
Patients in medical and surgical ICUs are at high risk for long-term cognitive impairment. A longer duration of delirium in the hospital was associated with worse global
cognition and executive function scores at 3 and 12 months. (Funded by the National
Institutes of Health and others; BRAIN-ICU ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00392795.)
1306
ME THODS
STUDY POPULATION AND SETTING
The Bringing to Light the Risk Factors and Incidence of Neuropsychological Dysfunction in ICU
Survivors (BRAIN-ICU) study was conducted at
Vanderbilt University Medical Center and Saint
Thomas Hospital in Nashville. Detailed definitions of the inclusion and exclusion criteria are
provided in the Supplementary Appendix, available
with the full text of this article at NEJM.org.
Briefly, we included adults admitted to a medical or surgical ICU with respiratory failure, cardiogenic shock, or septic shock. We excluded patients
with substantial recent ICU exposure (i.e., receipt
of mechanical ventilation in the 2 months before the current ICU admission, >5 ICU days in
the month before the current ICU admission, or
>72 hours with organ dysfunction during the
current ICU admission); patients who could not
be reliably assessed for delirium owing to blindness, deafness, or inability to speak English;
patients for whom follow-up would be difficult
owing to active substance abuse, psychotic disorder, homelessness, or residence 200 miles or
more from the enrolling center; patients who
were unlikely to survive for 24 hours; patients
for whom informed consent could not be obtained; and patients at high risk for preexisting
cognitive deficits owing to neurodegenerative
disease, recent cardiac surgery (within the pre
vious 3 months), suspected anoxic brain injury, or
severe dementia. Specifically, patients who were
suspected to have preexisting cognitive impairment on the basis of a score of 3.3 or more on
the Short Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive
Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE; on a scale from
1.0 to 5.0, with 5.0 indicating severe cognitive
impairment)17 were assessed by certified evaluators with the use of the Clinical Dementia Rating
(CDR) scale (with scores ranging from 0 to 3.0,
and higher scores indicating more severe dementia).18 Patients with a CDR score of more than
2.0 were excluded (additional information on the
IQCODE and CDR is provided in the Supplementary Appendix).
At enrollment, we obtained written informed
consent from all the patients or their authorized
surrogates; if consent was initially obtained
from a surrogate, we obtained consent from the
patient once he or she was deemed to be mentally competent. The study protocol was approved
by each local institutional review board.
RISK FACTORS, OUTCOMES, AND COVARIATES
We examined two primary independent risk factors: duration of delirium (defined as the number
of hospital days with delirium) and use of sedative or analgesic medications during hospitalization. Trained research personnel evaluated patients
for delirium and level of consciousness daily until hospital discharge or study day 30. Delirium
1307
The
n e w e ng l a n d j o u r na l
was assessed with the use of the Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU (CAM-ICU), a diagnostic algorithm for determining the presence or
absence of delirium on the basis of four features:
acute change or a fluctuation in mental status,
inattention, disorganized thinking, and altered
level of consciousness.19 Level of consciousness
was assessed with the use of the Richmond AgitationSedation Scale (RASS), on which scores
range from 5 to 4, with lower scores indicating
less arousal, higher scores indicating more agitation, and 0 indicating an alert and calm state.20
Throughout the hospitalization, we used medication-administration records to collect information
on daily doses of benzodiazepines (converted to
midazolam dose equivalents), opiates (converted
to fentanyl dose equivalents), propofol, and dexmedetomidine. Conversion factors are described
in the Supplementary Appendix.
Trained psychology professionals, who were
unaware of the patients in-hospital course, assessed patients global cognition 3 and 12 months
after hospital discharge using the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological
Status (RBANS), a comprehensive and validated
neuropsychometric battery for the evaluation of
global cognition, including individual domains of
immediate and delayed memory, attention, visuospatial construction, and language.21 The population age-adjusted mean (SD) for the RBANS
global cognition score and for the individual domains is 10015 (on a scale ranging from 40 to
160, with lower scores indicating worse performance). In addition, executive function (specifically, cognitive flexibility and set shifting) was
assessed with the use of the Trail Making Test,
Part B (Trails B)22; the age-, sex-, and educationadjusted mean T score is 50 (on a scale ranging
from 0 to 100, with lower scores indicating worse
executive function). All follow-up assessments are
described in detail in the Supplementary Appendix.
All covariates were chosen a priori on the
basis of clinical judgment and previous research,
owing to their expected associations with the
outcomes and with delirium, and thus their potential to be confounders. Details of the covariates and the range and clinical significance of
specific scores are provided in the Supplementary
Appendix. Briefly, covariates that were determined
at enrollment included age, years of education,
chronic disease burden according to the Charl-
1308
of
m e dic i n e
Because missing data rarely occur entirely at random,26 we assessed the associations between characteristics of the patient and status with respect to
missing data according to recommendations.27
Table S1 in the Supplementary Appendix shows
the frequency of missing outcomes, and Table S2
in the Supplementary Appendix shows that patients
with at least one missing outcome value were different from those with complete outcomes data in
small but potentially meaningful ways. The exclusion of such patients may have biased our results,
so we used multiple imputation to assign values to
missing risk factors and outcomes in regression
modeling. However, we did not impute data for
patients who had no cognitive-outcomes data (e.g.,
owing to death or withdrawal from the study).
We used single imputation for missing delirium and coma assessments. Of 10,558 patient-days
during which delirium or coma assessments were
expected, only 3% were missing and required
imputation.
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
tive or analgesic agents were independently associated with secondary outcomes (Trails B score
and RBANS scores for immediate memory, delayed memory, and attention) at 3 and 12 months.
Because we hypothesized that delirium and coma
may interact in their association with long-term
cognitive impairment, we assessed the data for
such interactions in all regression models.
In all models, drug doses were transformed
with the use of their cube root to reduce the
influence of extreme outliers, and continuous
variables were modeled with the use of restricted
cubic splines to allow for nonlinear associations
(with the exception of dexmedetomidine and
haloperidol doses, which were used so infrequently that the number of unique doses was too
small for splines).28 We also conducted sensitivity
analyses that were restricted to data for patients
who underwent all outcome assessments (i.e., a
complete case analysis). To determine whether an
altered level of consciousness confounded the association between delirium and long-term cognitive impairment, we conducted a sensitivity analysis with adjustment for duration of an altered
level of consciousness. Since days of delirium
and coma were already accounted for in our regression models, we included as a separate covariate the number of days without delirium and
without coma but with an altered level of consciousness (defined as a RASS score other than 0).
We also examined ICU type (medical vs. surgical)
as a potential confounder by including this variable in models in a separate sensitivity analysis.
We examined model diagnostics using residual
plots versus predicted plots and quantilequantile plots. All model assumptions were met adequately. Variance inflation due to multiple imputation was not problematic. We used R software,
version 3.0.1 (www.r-project.org), for all statistical analyses.
R E SULT S
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PATIENTS
cognitive impairment (Table 1). Delirium affected 606 patients (74%) during their hospital stay,
with a median duration of delirium of 4 days.
Between enrollment and the 3-month followup, 252 patients (31%) died; 448 of the 569 surviving patients (79%) underwent cognitive testing
3 months after discharge. Another 59 patients (7%
of the original cohort) died before the 12-month
follow-up, and 382 of the 510 surviving patients
(75%) were tested 12 months after discharge
(Fig. S1 in the Supplementary Appendix).
PREVALENCE AND SEVERITY OF LONG-TERM
COGNITIVE IMPAIRMENT
1309
The
n e w e ng l a n d j o u r na l
of
m e dic i n e
Characteristic
Follow-up Cohort
(N=467)
Age yr
Median
Interquartile range
White race no. (%)
61
59
5171
4969
740 (90)
413 (88)
420 (51)
234 (50)
559 (68)
298 (64)
Level of education yr
Median
12
12
1214
1214
51 (6)
26 (6)
45 (5)
23 (5)
14
14
25
24
1931
1930
712
712
Interquartile range
244 (30)
136 (29)
135 (16)
71 (15)
141 (17)
79 (17)
Upper-airway obstruction
87 (11)
49 (10)
63 (8)
29 (6)
11 (1)
7 (1)
82 (10)
65 (14)
Other diagnosis
58 (7)
31 (7)
746 (91)
421 (90)
18
16
606 (74)
352 (75)
27
27
Mechanical ventilation
No. of patients %
No. of days
Median
Interquartile range
Delirium
No. of patients %
No. of days
Median
Interquartile range
1310
Table 1. (Continued.)
In-Hospital Cohort
(N=821)
Characteristic
Follow-up Cohort
(N=467)
Coma
No. of patients %
517 (63)
265 (57)
26
15
10
10
617
618
Benzodiazepine
509 (62)
274 (59)
Propofol
425 (52)
256 (55)
Dexmedetomidine
105 (13)
63 (13)
Opiate
641 (78)
362 (78)
No. of days
Median
Interquartile range
Duration of hospital stay days
Median
Interquartile range
Use of sedative or analgesic agent in ICU no. (%)
* Percentages may not sum to 100, owing to rounding. Of the 821 patients for whom in-hospital data and assessments
were available, 467 underwent follow-up assessments at 3 months, 12 months, or both. A total of 354 patients did
not undergo follow-up (252 patients died and 74 withdrew from the study before the 3-month assessment, and 28
were permanently lost to follow-up). ICU denotes intensive care unit.
Race was determined according to the medical record or was reported by the patients surrogate.
Scores on the Short Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE) range from 1 to 5, with a
score of 3 indicating no change in cognition over the past 10 years, a score lower than 3 indicating improvement, and
a score higher than 3 indicating decline in cognition, as compared with 10 years before. A score of 3.3 or higher indicates an increased probability of cognitive impairment, and a score of 3.6 or higher indicates preexisting cognitive
impairment (see the Supplementary Appendix).
Scores on the Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) scale range from 0 to 3.0, with 0 indicating no impairment, 0.5 very
mild impairment, 1.0 mild impairment, 2.0 moderate impairment, and 3.0 severe impairment.
Scores on the Charlson comorbidity index range from 0 to 33, with higher scores indicating a greater burden of illness;
a score of 1 or 2 is associated with mortality of approximately 25% at 10 years.
Scores on the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II range from 0 to 71, with higher scores
indicating worse outcomes.
** Scores on the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) range from 0 to 24 (from 0 to 4 for each of six organ
systems), with higher scores indicating more severe organ dysfunction. We used a modified SOFA score in our regression models, which excluded the Glasgow Coma Scale components, since coma was included separately in our
models.
Acute respiratory failure included the acute respiratory distress syndrome, acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive
pulmonary disease or asthma, pulmonary edema, embolus, and fibrosis.
Other surgical procedures included hepatobiliary surgery, liver transplantation, and orthopedic, obstetrical or gynecologic, vascular, otolaryngologic, and urologic surgery.
1311
The
n e w e ng l a n d j o u r na l
of
m e dic i n e
DISCUSSION
100
Normal
80
MCI
TBI
Alzheimers
disease
60
40
0
3 Mo
(N= 97)
12 Mo
(N= 89)
49 Yr
3 Mo
12 Mo
(N= 147) (N= 138)
5064 Yr
3 Mo
(N= 130)
12 Mo
(N= 98)
65 Yr
In this multicenter, prospective cohort study involving a diverse population of patients in general medical and surgical ICUs, we found that one out of
four patients had cognitive impairment 12 months
after critical illness that was similar in severity to
that of patients with mild Alzheimers disease,
and one out of three had impairment typically
associated with moderate traumatic brain injury.
Impairments affected a broader array of neuropsychological domains than is characteristically
seen in Alzheimers disease, but the impairments
were very similar to those observed after moderate traumatic brain injury. A validated instrument
that assessed baseline cognitive status showed
that only 6% of patients had evidence of mild-tomoderate cognitive impairment before ICU admission, indicating that these profound cognitive
deficits were new in the majority of patients.
Long-term cognitive impairment affected both
old and young patients, regardless of the burden
of coexisting conditions at baseline.
A longer duration of delirium was associated
with worse long-term global cognition and executive function, an association that was independent of sedative or analgesic medication use,
age, preexisting cognitive impairment, the burden
of coexisting conditions, and ongoing organ failures during ICU care. Although the mechanisms
by which delirium may predispose patients to
long-term cognitive impairment after critical illness have not yet been elucidated, delirium is associated with inflammation and neuronal apoptosis, which may lead to brain atrophy.32,33 Delirium
has previously been associated with cerebral atrophy34 and reduced white-matter integrity35; both
atrophy and white-matter disruption are associated with cognitive impairment.34,35 It is also
possible that patients who are vulnerable to delirium owing to severe critical illness are also
vulnerable to long-term cognitive impairment and
that delirium does not play a causal role in the
development of persistent cognitive impairment.
After adjustment for delirium, we did not find
any consistent associations between the use of
sedative or analgesic medications and long-term
cognitive impairment. The significant association
nejm.org
october 3, 2013
Dexmedetomidine (g)
1238.8
3826
804
7.88
75th
0.14
0.31
0.83
0.20
0.12
0.001
P value
At 12 Mo
At 3 Mo
0.04
0.19
0.96
0.17
0.87
0.04
P value
At 3 Mo
0.06
0.57
0.44
0.04
0.70
0.004
P value
0.09
0.93
0.61
0.19
0.79
At 12 Mo
* Results shown are from linear regression models in which outcome variables were global cognition scores on the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status
(RBANS; on a scale from 40 to 160, with lower scores indicating worse performance) or the Trail Making Test, Part B (Trails B; with scores ranging from 0 to 100, and lower scores
indicating worse executive function), the independent variables were duration of delirium, duration of coma, and mean dose of sedative or analgesic medications (all included simultaneously in the model), and the covariates were the following potential confounders, which were selected a priori: age, educational level, coexisting conditions, preexisting cognitive
impairment, apolipoprotein E genotype, stroke risk, and ICU variables, including the mean scores for the severity of illness, mean haloperidol dose, duration of severe sepsis, duration
of hypoxemia, and an interaction between delirium and coma.
Differences (point estimates) in the RBANS and the Trails B scores in the linear regression analyses reflect a comparison between the 25th and the 75th percentile values for each variable among all 821 patients in the original cohort (with the exception of dexmedetomidine dose; because more than 85% of patients received no dexmedetomidine, we used the minimum and maximum doses instead). For example, in a comparison of patients with no delirium and those with 5 days of delirium, with all other covariates held constant, patients with
5 days of delirium had RBANS global cognition scores that were 5.6 points lower at 12 months than did those with no delirium. This represents a decrease of approximately 0.5 SD,
which is considered to be a clinically significant decline (see the Supplementary Appendix). A similar comparison of executive-function scores at 3 and 12 months showed a decrease of
0.5 SD in the scores for patients with 5 days of delirium, which is a clinically significant decline according to the neuropsychology literature. CI denotes confidence interval.
We used restricted cubic splines for all continuous variables, which allows for a nonlinear relationship between covariates and outcomes but requires multiple beta coefficients to estimate
the effect. The most appropriate P value is one that takes into consideration all these beta coefficients together. Although the P value may indicate significance (and is correct), the comparison of the 25th and 75th percentiles may yield a point estimate with a confidence interval that crosses zero, or vice versa.
13.3
Propofol (mg)
Opiate (mg)
Benzodiazepine (mg)
25th
Percentile
Independent Variable
Table 2. Effect of Duration of Delirium, Duration of Coma, and Exposure to Sedative or Analgesic Agents on Global Cognition and Executive Function.*
1313
The
n e w e ng l a n d j o u r na l
90
80
70
60
N=382
P=0.04
10
Days of Delirium
of
m e dic i n e
nejm.org
october 3, 2013
We were not able, however, to address the possibility of confounding by death or withdrawal. Finally,
as with any observational study, the possibility of
bias due to unmeasured confounders cannot be
excluded.
In conclusion, cognitive impairment after
critical illness is very common and in some patients persists for at least 1 year. Patients with a
longer duration of delirium are more likely than
those with a shorter duration of delirium to have
cognitive deficits.
APPENDIX
The authors full names, degrees, and affiliations are as follows: Pratik P. Pandharipande, M.D., M.S.C.I., the Department of Anesthesiology, Division of Critical Care, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, and the Anesthesia Service, Department of Veterans Affairs,
Tennessee Valley Healthcare System both in Nashville; Timothy D. Girard, M.D., M.S.C.I., the Department of Medicine, Division of
Allergy, Pulmonary, and Critical Care Medicine, and the Center for Health Services Research, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine,
and the Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center (GRECC), Department of Veterans Affairs, Tennessee Valley Healthcare System
both in Nashville; James C. Jackson, Psy.D., the Department of Medicine, Division of Allergy, Pulmonary, and Critical Care Medicine,
the Center for Health Services Research, and the Department of Psychiatry, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, and the Research
Service, Department of Veterans Affairs, Tennessee Valley Healthcare System both in Nashville; Alessandro Morandi, M.D., M.P.H.,
the Rehabilitation and Aged Care Unit, Hospital Ancelle, Cremona, and the Geriatric Research Group, Brescia both in Italy; Jennifer
L. Thompson, M.P.H., the Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville; Brenda T. Pun, R.N.,
M.S.N., the Center for Health Services Research, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville; Nathan E. Brummel, M.D.,
M.S.C.I., the Department of Medicine, Division of Allergy, Pulmonary, and Critical Care Medicine, and the Center for Health Services
Research, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville; Christopher G. Hughes, M.D., the Department of Anesthesiology, Division of Critical Care, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, and the Anesthesia Service, Department of Veterans Affairs, Tennessee
Valley Healthcare System both in Nashville; Eduard E. Vasilevskis, M.D., M.P.H., the Center for Health Services Research and the
Department of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine and Public Health, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, and the
GRECC, Department of Veterans Affairs, Tennessee Valley Healthcare System both in Nashville; Ayumi K. Shintani, Ph.D., M.P.H.,
the Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville; Karel G. Moons, Ph.D., the Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, and the Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University
Medical Center, Utrecht, the Netherlands; Sunil K. Geevarghese, M.D., M.S.C.I., the Department of Surgery, Division of Hepatobiliary
Surgery and Liver Transplantation, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville; Angelo Canonico, M.D., Saint Thomas Hospital,
Nashville; Ramona O. Hopkins, Ph.D., the Department of Medicine, Pulmonary and Critical Care Division, Intermountain Medical
Center, Murray, and the Psychology Department and Neuroscience Center, Brigham Young University, Provo both in Utah; Gordon
R. Bernard, M.D., the Department of Medicine, Division of Allergy, Pulmonary, and Critical Care Medicine, Vanderbilt University School
of Medicine, Nashville; Robert S. Dittus, M.D., M.P.H., the Center for Health Services Research and the Department of Medicine, Division
of General Internal Medicine and Public Health, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, and the GRECC, Department of Veterans
Affairs, Tennessee Valley Healthcare System both in Nashville; and E. Wesley Ely, M.D., M.P.H., the Department of Medicine, Division
of Allergy, Pulmonary, and Critical Care Medicine, and the Center for Health Services Research, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine,
and the GRECC, Department of Veterans Affairs, Tennessee Valley Healthcare System both in Nashville.
References
1. Hopkins RO, Weaver LK, Pope D,
1315
MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 1987;40:373-83.
24. Llewellyn DJ, Lang IA, Xie J, Huppert
FA, Melzer D, Langa KM. Framingham
Stroke Risk Profile and poor cognitive
function: a population-based study. BMC
Neurol 2008;8:12.
25. Ferreira FL, Bota DP, Bross A, Mlot
C, Vincent JL. Serial evaluation of the
SOFA score to predict outcome in critically ill patients. JAMA 2001;286:1754-8.
26. Little RJ, DAgostino R, Cohen ML, et
al. The prevention and treatment of missing data in clinical trials. N Engl J Med
2012;367:1355-60.
27. Little RJA, Rubin DB. Statistical analysis
with missing data. New York: Wiley, 1987.
28. Harrell FE Jr. Regression modeling
strategies: with applications to linear
models, logistic regression, and survival
analysis. New York: Springer, 2001.
29. Hobson VL, Hall JR, HumphreysClark JD, Schrimsher GW, OBryant SE.
Identifying functional impairment with
scores from the Repeatable Battery for the
Assessment of Neuropsychological Status
(RBANS). Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 2010;
25:525-30.
30. McKay C, Casey JE, Wertheimer J,
Fichtenberg NL. Reliability and validity of
the RBANS in a traumatic brain injured
sample. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 2007;22:
91-8.
31. Randolph C. Repeatable Battery for
the Assessment of Neuropsychological
Status (RBANS) manual. San Antonio, TX:
Psychological Corporation, 1998.
32. van Gool WA, van de Beek D, Eikelenboom P. Systemic infection and delirium:
when cytokines and acetylcholine collide.
Lancet 2010;375:773-5.
1316