Risk prediction models for emergence delirium in paediatric general anaesthesia: a systematic review.
systematic_review · Level I
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 33408214.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043968 and PMC identifier 7789445.
- Licence recorded as CC BY-NC.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
Emergence delirium (ED) occurs in approximately 25% of paediatric general anaesthetics and has significant adverse effects. The goal of the current systematic review was to identify the existing literature investigating performance of predictive models for the development of paediatric ED following general anaesthesia and to determine their usability. Systematic review using the Prediction model study Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST) framework. Medline (Ovid), PubMed, Embase (Ovid), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (Ovid), Cochrane CENTRAL (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), Scopus (Elsevier) and Web of Science (Clarivate Analytics), ClinicalTrials.gov, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ProQuest Digital Dissertations and Theses International through 17 November 2020. All randomised controlled trials and cohort studies investigating predictive models for the development of ED in children undergoing general anaesthesia. Following title, abstract and full-text screening by two reviewers, data were extracted from all eligible studies, including demographic parameters, details of anaesthetics and performance characteristics of the predictive scores for ED. Evidence quality and predictive score usability were assessed according to the PROBAST framework. The current systematic review yielded 9242 abstracts, of which only one study detailing the development and validation of the Emergence Agitation Risk Scale (EARS) met the inclusion criteria. EARS had good discrimination with c-index of 0.81 (95% CI 0.72 to 0.89). Calibration showed a non-significant Homer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test (p=0.97). Although the EARS demonstrated low concern of applicability, the high risk of bias compromised the overall usability of this model. The current systematic review concluded that EARS has good discrimination performance but low usability to predict ED in a paediatric population. Further research is warranted to develop novel models for the prediction of ED in paediatric anaesthesia. CRD42019141950.
Medical subject headings
- Anesthesia, General
- Cognition
- Emergence Delirium