Abstract
Background
Delirium is common in geriatric inpatients and associated with poor outcomes. Hospitalization is associated with low levels of physical activity. Motor symptoms are common in delirium, but how delirium affects physical activity remains unknown.
Aims
To investigate differences in physical activity between geriatric inpatients with and without delirium.
Methods
We included acutely admitted patients ≥ 75 years in a prospective observational study at a medical geriatric ward at a Norwegian University Hospital. Delirium was diagnosed according to the DSM-5 criteria. Physical activity was measured by an accelerometer-based device worn on the right thigh. The main outcome was time in upright position (upright time) per 24 h (00.00 to 23.59) on the first day of hospitalization with verified delirium status. Group differences were analysed using t test.
Results
We included 237 patients, mean age 86.1 years (Standard Deviation (SD) 5.1), and 73 patients (30.8%) had delirium. Mean upright time day 1 for the entire group was 92.2 min (SD 84.3), with 50.9 min (SD 50.7) in the delirium group and 110.6 min (SD 89.7) in the no-delirium group, mean difference 59.7 minutes, 95% Confidence Interval 41.6 to 77.8, p value < 0.001.
Discussion
Low levels of physical activity in patients with delirium raise the question if immobilization may contribute to poor outcomes in delirium. Future studies should investigate if mobilization interventions could improve outcomes of delirium.
Conclusions
In this sample of geriatric inpatients, the group with delirium had lower levels of physical activity than the group without delirium.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Delirium is a disturbance in arousal, attention and cognition that is acute and/or fluctuating and occurs secondary to one or more physiological disturbances [1]. Delirium is common in all hospital settings [2], but is especially prevalent in geriatric patients as high age, cognitive impairment, frailty, and severe comorbidity are important risk factors [3, 4]. Delirium is distressing and consistently associated with adverse outcomes like increased mortality, increased risk of dementia, longer length of hospital stays, more complications and increased costs [5,6,7]. Delirium can be classified as hypoactive, hyperactive, mixed and no-subtype delirium based on highly visible psychomotor symptoms [8], and motor disturbances are suggested as core features of delirium [9].
Delirium is unrecognized in about two out of three cases [10, 11], thus, underdiagnosing may contribute to the poor outcomes of delirium [12]. Other possible contributors to the poor outcomes may be lack of cooperation with treatment and rehabilitation and that delirium initiates a negative spiral leading to complications of bedrest like pressure ulcers, hypoxia, pneumonia, and venous thromboembolism [13,14,15]. Hypoactive delirium is most frequently overlooked [16] and is associated with poor outcomes [17,18,19], the latter possibly due to complications of bedrest [13, 14].
Previous studies report that hospitalized geriatric patients on average spend between one and two hours standing or walking per day [20,21,22,23]. Patients with delirium have reduced motor function as measured by performance-based tests [9, 24, 25]. We have previously reported low levels of motor activity across all delirium motor subtypes in a sample of geriatric inpatients [26], raising the question if patients with delirium in general have low levels of physical activity contributing to underdiagnosing and poor outcomes.
The aim of this paper is to compare physical activity between patients with on-going delirium and patients without delirium in a sample of hospitalized geriatric patients using objective measures of physical activity from a body-worn accelerometer-based device. We hypothesized that patients with delirium had lower levels of physical activity than patients without delirium.
Methods
Design, settings and participants
This paper reports secondary analyses from a prospective observational study on delirium motor subtypes (DeMo) conducted at the medical geriatric ward at St. Olavs hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, Norway, between May 2015 and January 2017 [26,27,28]. St. Olavs hospital is the university hospital for the region Mid-Norway and the local hospital for the city of Trondheim and nearby municipalities.
The geriatric ward has 15 beds and is an integrated part of the Medical Clinic. Patients are admitted with a wide range of medical conditions and geriatric syndromes, except patients admitted with suspected stroke as St. Olavs hospital have a dedicated stroke unit. Patients receive comprehensive geriatric assessment and care from an interdisciplinary team of physicians, nurses, physiotherapists and occupational therapists [29]. The ward is built to enhance physical activity, and all personnel work together towards the same treatment goals including early mobilization. During the study period, there were no protocols or medical directives aiming to reduce overall physical activity of patients with delirium. The mean length of hospital stay at the ward during the study period was 7.6 days.
Acutely admitted patients ≥ 75 years were eligible for participation in the DeMo study. Exclusion criteria were inability to speak/read Norwegian and previous participation in the study. Trained nurses, occupational therapists, physiotherapists, and physicians could include patients. Participants were included within 24 h after arrival at the geriatric ward and were invited to wear an accelerometer-based device on the right thigh during hospital stay. In the present paper, we have included patients enrolled in the DeMo study with complete accelerometer data from minimum one entire day (00.00 to 23.59) with verified DSM-5 delirium status. The delirium group includes both patients with prevalent delirium on admission and patients developing delirium during hospital stay, and the non-delirium group consists of patients remaining free of delirium during the entire hospital stay.
Ethical considerations
Due to the noninvasive, observational character of the DeMo study, patients could consent for participation and sign the consent form even if they had clear signs of cognitive impairment. For patients that obviously did not understand the information, we sought written informed consent from a proxy. When in doubt about the patient’s capacity, we always informed a proxy about the study. The project was approved by The Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics of Mid-Norway (REK Central 2015/474).
Diagnosing delirium
Delirium was diagnosed according to the DSM-5 criteria [30]. S.E. screened all patients admitted to the geriatric ward based on chart review and interviews with proxies and staff and visited all patients with possible delirium and/or cognitive impairment. Arousal and alertness were assessed clinically and based on the first item of the Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale (MDAS), a validated scale to measure the severity of delirium [31]. Attention and cognitive function were assessed using the digit span forwards and backwards and the orientation and memory items from the MDAS. Chart review and interviews with proxies were made to ascertain that the clinical picture represented an acute change and/or fluctuation, was due to physiological disturbances and could not be explained by previous underlying cognitive impairment. All available information was considered before a decision whether the patient had delirium or not was reached. Delirium motor subtypes were classified according to the Delirium Motor Subtype Scale (DMSS) [8]. The diagnostic work-up was carried out as early as possible during the hospital stay but was not repeated daily.
Activity monitoring
The activPAL (35 × 53 × 7 mm, 15 g, activPAL, PAL Technologies Ltd., Glascow, UK) is a three-axial accelerometer-based device that is worn continuously and attached with a waterproof tape to the midpoint of the thigh for the entire recording period. The activPAL utilizes the inclination of the thigh to distinguish between sitting/lying (sedentary) position and standing/walking (upright) position. The device underestimates step count in older patients due to low gait speed but is accurate in distinguishing sedentary and upright positions [32]. The activPAL focuses on positions and not intensity and is useful for research in older patients not able to perform high intensity activities [33, 34].
The ward staff member responsible for inclusion attached the activPAL device and noticed time of attachment on a paper form. Patients wore the device continuously until discharge or up to a maximum of 7 days. The device was removed before radiological procedures and reattached as soon as possible. The device was not applied in case of patient’s refusal. Regarding non-wear, all time points of removing, reattachment and final removing were recorded on the paper form. At discharge, data were downloaded through a docking station by S.E. or a trained physiotherapist who checked the quality of activity data by visual inspection of output from the activPAL software. Time in upright position per 24-h period were derived using the manufacturer’s Excel spreadsheets from software V.7.3.32 (activPAL, PAL Technologies, Ltd.) and a custom MATLAB program to create an Excel spreadsheet with activity data sorted on day 1 to day 7 for all participants.
Outcomes
Previous studies using activPALs for activity monitoring inpatients with delirium have used sit-to-stand transitions and/or time in an upright position (upright time) as outcomes [26, 35]. In the present paper, we report upright time as minutes per day (defined as a 24-h period from 00.00 to 23.59). The main outcome is upright time the first day with complete activity data defined as no non-wear time registered on the paper form and verified delirium status, defined as day 1. The secondary outcome is upright time during the next days of the hospital stay until day 7.
Baseline characteristics
Based on all available information, the interdisciplinary team scored the Global Deterioration Scale (GDS) as a measure of cognitive function prior to admission. If the team had not scored the GDS, S.E. completed the scale based on chart review. GDS ranges from 1 to 7, with a score of 1 indicating no signs of cognitive impairment, and a score of 7 indicating end-stage dementia [36]. We considered a score ≥ 4 as indicative of dementia. S.E. completed the Barthel Index (BI) as a measure of personal Activities of Daily Living (pADL) prior to admission based on information from proxies and electronic referrals from the municipalities. BI ranges from 0 to 20, with a score of 20 indicating independency in pADL function [37]. A now retired professor in geriatrics completed the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale (CIRS) as a measure of comorbidity [38]. CIRS ranges from 0 to 56. Zero indicates no health problems and an increasing score indicates increasing comorbidity and risk of mortality. Information on age, sex, body mass index (BMI) and place of residence were collected from the medical records.
Statistical analyses
We present continuous data as means and standard deviations (SD) and dichotomous data as frequencies and percentages (%). Normality was checked through visual inspection of Q-Q plots. We used t test and Mann–Whitney U test to compare upright time between the delirium group and the no-delirium group on day one and linear mixed models to compare differences between the two groups across time during hospital stay. p values were based on two-sided tests with values < 0.05 considered statistically significant. We report 95% confidence intervals (CI) where appropriate. Power analysis was conducted for the DeMo study, but not for the analyses in the present paper. All analyses were carried out in SPSS version 27.
Results
In total, 311 patients were included in the DeMo study, of these 103 (33.1%) had delirium. In the present paper, we report results from 237 patients for whom we had complete activity data. Of these, 73 (30.8%) patients were diagnosed with delirium and 130 (54.8%) had a GDS-score of 4–7, indicative of dementia. Mean age was 86.1 years (SD 5.1), and 147 (62.0%) were female. Figure 1 is a flowchart illustrating the selection of patients for the present paper. Table 1 presents the participants’ baseline characteristics. Patients with delirium were more cognitively impaired, had more comorbidities and were more dependent in pADL function. Among the 73 patients with delirium, 20 (27%) had hyperactive delirium, 23 (32%) hypoactive, 20 (27%) mixed, and 10 (14%) no-subtype delirium. Baseline characteristics of the 74 patients not included in the DeMo study are described in Supplementary table S1.
Mean upright time for all patients on their first day of hospital stay with complete accelerometer data was 92.2 min (SD 84.3). Patients with on-going delirium had a mean upright time of 50.9 min (SD 50.7), as compared to 110.6 min (SD 89.7) for patients without delirium, mean difference 59.7 min (CI 41.6 to 77.8). The difference was statistically significant, t (222) = 6.5, p value < 0.001. Repeating the comparison using Mann–Whitney U test gave similar results. In the group with delirium, upright time per day increased significantly during hospital stay, on average 6.89 min per day (p = 0.009), but there was no significant effect of time on upright activity in the no-delirium group (estimate 0.54 min per day, p = 0.77). Figure 2 illustrates upright time for the delirium group and the no-delirium group from day 1 to day 7.
Regarding delirium motor subtypes, the mean upright time for the hyperactive group was 58.3 min (SD 46.8), for the hypoactive group 40.4 min (SD 43.1), for the mixed group 35.1 min (SD 41.4) and for the no-subtype group 91.9 min (SD 46.8).
Discussion
In this prospective observational study on acutely admitted geriatric patients, we found that patients with on-going delirium had significantly lower levels of upright activity than patients without delirium as measured objectively using an accelerometer-based device. Patients with delirium spent about half the time in an upright position as compared to patients without delirium, the difference was about one hour per day which is a large difference as the level of physical activity in hospitalized geriatric patients is generally low. The levels of upright activity between the delirium group and the no-delirium group converged towards the end of the hospital stay.
To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study comparing objective measures of motor activity between relatively large groups of acutely admitted geriatric patients with on-going delirium and patients without delirium. Godfrey compared upright activity between six patients with hyperactive delirium, ten with hypoactive, nine with mixed delirium and nine patients without delirium, reporting that patients without delirium had activity levels similar to patients with hyperactive delirium [35]. Bellelli investigated the relation between delirium and physical performance in an in-hospital rehabilitation unit and reported that patients with on-going delirium had poorer results on physical performance tests as measured with the Tinetti scale and the Trunk Control Test than patients without delirium, and that results improved when delirium resolved [24]. Gual found that patients with delirium on admission to acute and rehabilitation wards had reduced motor functions on the physical performance test Hierarchical Assessment of Balance and Mobility (HABAM), this was particularly pronounced for patients with delirium superimposed on dementia [25]. Richardson reported that among acutely hospitalized older patients assessed daily for delirium and physical function with the HABAM scale, patients with delirium had poorer physical function than patients without delirium [9]. Put together, these three studies strongly indicate that patients with delirium have reduced motor function as measured by physical performance tests [9, 24, 25]. Our results add that reduced motor function translates into reduced levels of upright activity, supporting the argument that motor disturbances are core features of delirium.
According to our results, delirium means less, not more, physical activity, which is an important message to all clinicians and delirium researchers, both in terms of delirium recognition and delirium care. Delirium may remain underdiagnosed because patients presenting with hypoactive symptoms are not recognized with delirium [13, 14], and incorporation of motor disturbances in delirium screening tools may contribute to increased delirium recognition since about 90 % of patients with delirium have some sort of motor symptoms [14, 17,18,19, 27]. The results also suggest that acutely impaired gait function and tendency of falling could be signs of delirium and among other interventions should call for delirium screening.
Several studies document low levels of ambulation and physical activity among hospitalized older patients [20, 21, 23, 39], and low levels of in-hospital physical activity is associated with elevated mortality [22]. Delirium affects one in four hospitalized older patients [40], and our results indicate that all patients with delirium, not limited to the hypoactive group, have very low levels of physical activity. Low levels of physical activity may contribute to a decline in muscular strength, balance and gait function and reduce out of bed activities like dressing, hygiene and eating, all key activities to live independently. At worst, low levels of physical activity may lead to life threatening complications of bedrest like infections, hypoxia and venous thromboembolism, and it is possible that bedrest linked to delirium contributes to poor outcomes like increased length of hospital stay, institutionalization and increased mortality. Consequently, physical activity is endorsed in the delirium management guidelines and should be provided by a multidisciplinary team. Specifically, Inouye and colleagues have created a mobility action package to promote mobilization and walking during an acute hospital stay, and current knowledge highlight the importance of incorporating such mobility programs in delirium care [41].
In line with previous studies [9, 24, 25], patients diagnosed with delirium increased their activity levels towards end of hospitalization. This is likely due to delirium resolution but remains uncertain as we did not conduct repeated delirium assessment. The no-delirium group does not seem to show the same increase in upright time, this could be due to a selection bias as the fittest patients without delirium likely were discharged early and the patients remaining in-hospital towards day 7 show slow recovery from their illness.
Our results and previous studies on motor activity and delirium call for studies investigating how motor disturbances could be incorporated into delirium screening programs and for well-conducted mobilization trials investigating if interventions focusing on physical activity could improve outcomes for patients with delirium. Further, there is no established method to monitor delirium over time and no consensus on how to decide when a delirium episode has resolved. Repeated measures of physical function may be a strategy for delirium monitoring [9, 24, 25], our results raise the question if “live” activity monitoring with small devices could be an alternative for activity monitoring in general and delirium monitoring specifically [42]. Compared to repeated assessment by health care personnel such monitoring may be time-sparing and more feasible. Finally, recent studies highlight the importance of integrating artificial intelligence and machine learning algorithms in geriatric medicine [43]. Indeed, automatic monitoring of motor changes during hospitalization may support early recognition of delirium and its evolution improving rapid and accurate treatment of the underlying causes.
The strengths of this study are the objective measures of physical activity and the relatively large sample size. Limitations are the lack of repeated delirium assessment, the lack of measures of physical function prior to admission and the lack of frailty assessment. The differences in activity levels could be explained by differences in baseline characteristics, but we have previously published results indicating that cognitive function, age, comorbidities and dependency do not influence physical activity in hospitalized geriatric patients [23]. Further limitations are the lack of admittance diagnosis and uncertainty about the quality of non-wear registrations that could have influenced the activity data from day 2 to day 7. However, a very low percentage of the patients has registered non-wear in this period, ranging from 6.3% on day 2 to 0 on day 7 with limited impact on the results. A possible limitation is that we report secondary analysis from a study designed for other purposes, but the DeMo study was a dedicated delirium study, and activity monitoring during hospital stay was an integrated, pre-planned part of the study design.
To conclude, hospitalized geriatric patients with on-going delirium had significantly reduced upright activity as compared to patients without delirium; the latter group spent more than twice the time daily in upright position as compared to the delirium group. The low levels of upright activity in the delirium group are of particular concern since hospitalization by itself carries a large risk of immobilization and loss of physical function. Findings support that motor disturbances are core features of delirium that could be used to improve the detection of delirium and raise the question whether low levels of upright activity may contribute to poor outcomes of delirium. The results emphasize the need for further research investigating if incorporation of motor disturbances in screening tools could improve delirium detection and if mobilization interventions could improve delirium outcomes.
Data availability
Data are not available as we do not have approval from The Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics of Mid-Norway to share data.
References
Wilson JE, Mart MF, Cunningham C et al (2020) Delirium. Nat Rev Dis Primers 6:90
Ryan DJ, O’Regan NA, Caoimh RO et al (2013) Delirium in an adult acute hospital population: predictors, prevalence and detection. BMJ Open 3:e001772
Elie M, Cole MG, Primeau FJ et al (1998) Delirium risk factors in elderly hospitalized patients. J Gen Intern Med 13:204–212
Persico I, Cesari M, Morandi A et al (2018) Frailty and delirium in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. J Am Geriatr Soc 66:2022–2030
Witlox J, Eurelings LS, de Jonghe JF et al (2010) Delirium in elderly patients and the risk of postdischarge mortality, institutionalization, and dementia: a meta-analysis. JAMA 304:443–451
Gleason LJ, Schmitt EM, Kosar CM et al (2015) Effect of delirium and other major complications on outcomes after elective surgery in older adults. JAMA Surg 150:1134–1140
Pezzullo L, Streatfeild J, Hickson J et al (2019) Economic impact of delirium in Australia: a cost of illness study. BMJ Open 9:e027514
Meagher D, Moran M, Raju B et al (2008) A new data-based motor subtype schema for delirium. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 20:185–193
Richardson S, Murray J, Davis D et al (2022) Delirium and delirium severity predict the trajectory of the hierarchical assessment of balance and mobility in hospitalized older people: findings from the DECIDE study. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 77:531–535
Oh ES, Fong TG, Hshieh TT et al (2017) Delirium in older persons: advances in diagnosis and treatment. JAMA 318:1161–1174
Geriatric Medicine Research C (2019) Delirium is prevalent in older hospital inpatients and associated with adverse outcomes: results of a prospective multi-centre study on World Delirium Awareness Day. BMC Med 17:229
Kakuma R, du Fort GG, Arsenault L et al (2003) Delirium in older emergency department patients discharged home: effect on survival. J Am Geriatr Soc 51:443–450
Jackson TA, Wilson D, Richardson S et al (2016) Predicting outcome in older hospital patients with delirium: a systematic literature review. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 31:392–399
Meagher DJ, Leonard M, Donnelly S et al (2011) A longitudinal study of motor subtypes in delirium: relationship with other phenomenology, etiology, medication exposure and prognosis. J Psychosom Res 71:395–403
Robinson TN, Raeburn CD, Tran ZV et al (2011) Motor subtypes of postoperative delirium in older adults. Arch Surg 146:295–300
Albrecht JS, Marcantonio ER, Roffey DM et al (2015) Stability of postoperative delirium psychomotor subtypes in individuals with hip fracture. J Am Geriatr Soc 63:970–976
Kiely DK, Jones RN, Bergmann MA et al (2007) Association between psychomotor activity delirium subtypes and mortality among newly admitted post-acute facility patients. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 62:174–179
Bellelli G, Speciale S, Barisione E et al (2007) Delirium subtypes and 1-year mortality among elderly patients discharged from a post-acute rehabilitation facility. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 62:1182–1183
Gual N, Inzitari M, Carrizo G et al (2018) Delirium subtypes and associated characteristics in older patients with exacerbation of chronic conditions. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry 26:1204–1212
Pedersen MM, Bodilsen AC, Petersen J et al (2013) Twenty-four-hour mobility during acute hospitalization in older medical patients. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 68:331–337
Villumsen M, Jorgensen MG, Andreasen J et al (2015) Very low levels of physical activity in older patients during hospitalization at an acute geriatric ward: a prospective cohort study. J Aging Phys Act 23:542–549
Ostir GV, Berges IM, Kuo YF et al (2013) Mobility activity and its value as a prognostic indicator of survival in hospitalized older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc 61:551–557
Evensen S, Sletvold O, Lydersen S et al (2017) Physical activity among hospitalized older adults—an observational study. BMC Geriatr 17:110
Bellelli G, Speciale S, Morghen S et al (2011) Are fluctuations in motor performance a diagnostic sign of delirium? J Am Med Dir Assoc 12:578–583
Gual N, Richardson SJ, Davis DHJ et al (2019) Impairments in balance and mobility identify delirium in patients with comorbid dementia. Int Psychogeriatr 31:749–753
Evensen S, Bourke AK, Lydersen S et al (2019) Motor activity across delirium motor subtypes in geriatric patients assessed using body-worn sensors: a Norwegian cross-sectional study. BMJ Open 9:e026401
Evensen S, Saltvedt I, Lydersen S et al (2019) Delirium motor subtypes and prognosis in hospitalized geriatric patients—A prospective observational study. J Psychosom Res 122:24–28
Evensen S, Saltvedt I, Lydersen S et al (2018) Environmental factors and risk of delirium in geriatric patients: an observational study. BMC Geriatr 18:282
Ellis G, Gardner M, Tsiachristas A et al (2017) Comprehensive geriatric assessment for older adults admitted to hospital. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 9:CD006211
Association AP (2013) Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (DSM-5). American Psychiatric Publishing, Washington DC
Breitbart W, Rosenfeld B, Roth A et al (1997) The memorial delirium assessment scale. J Pain Symptom Manage 13:128–137
O’Brien MW, Wu Y, Petterson JL et al (2022) Validity of the ActivPAL monitor to distinguish postures: a systematic review. Gait Posture 94:107–113
Chan CS, Slaughter SE, Jones CA et al (2017) Measuring activity performance of older adults using the activPAL: a rapid review. Healthcare (Basel) 5:94
Taraldsen K, Chastin SF, Riphagen II et al (2012) Physical activity monitoring by use of accelerometer-based body-worn sensors in older adults: a systematic literature review of current knowledge and applications. Maturitas 71:13–19
Godfrey A, Leonard M, Donnelly S et al (2010) Validating a new clinical subtyping scheme for delirium with electronic motion analysis. Psychiatry Res 178:186–190
Reisberg B, Ferris SH, de Leon MJ et al (1982) The global deterioration Scale for assessment of primary degenerative dementia. Am J Psychiatry 139:1136–1139
Mahoney FI, Barthel DW (1965) Functional evaluation: the barthel index. Md State Med J 14:61–65
Salvi F, Miller MD, Grilli A et al (2008) A manual of guidelines to score the modified cumulative illness rating scale and its validation in acute hospitalized elderly patients. J Am Geriatr Soc 56:1926–1931
Brown CJ, Redden DT, Flood KL et al (2009) The underrecognized epidemic of low mobility during hospitalization of older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc 57:1660–1665
Gibb K, Seeley A, Quinn T et al (2020) The consistent burden in published estimates of delirium occurrence in medical inpatients over four decades: a systematic review and meta-analysis study. Age Ageing 49:352–360
Inouye SK (2018) Mobility action group: change package and toolkit. John A. Hartford Foundation, Boston MA
Valkenet K, Bor P, Reijneveld E et al (2022) Physical activity monitoring during hospital stay: a validation study. Disabil Rehabil 17:1–6
Woodman RJ, Mangoni AA (2023) A comprehensive review of machine learning algorithms and their application in geriatric medicine: present and future. Aging Clin Exp Res 35:2363–2397
Acknowledgements
Warm thanks to all patients and proxies who took part in the project and made the study possible to conduct. We want to thank Prof em. Olav Sletvold and Professor Ingvild Saltvedt for their contribution to the planning and conduction of the study. We also thank the entire staff at the geriatric ward who contributed to the project. We also thank Xiangchun Tan for help with processing activity data and Joseph Sexton for help with statistical analyses. A special thanks to Physiotherapist Helga Reklev for her help with collection of activity data.
Funding
Open access funding provided by Diakonhjemmet Hospital. The Liaison Committee for education, research and innovation in Central Norway funded the project. The funder had no role in designing the study, in the collection and interpretation of data or in writing the manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation and data collection were performed by Sigurd Evensen, Stina Aam and Kristin Taraldsen. Analysis were performed by Sigurd Evensen and Kristin Taraldsen. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Sigurd Evensen and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
Alessandro Morandi has received honoraria from Nestlé. None of the other authors have financial or personal conflicts to declare.
Conflicts of interest
Alessandro Morandi has received honoraria from Nestlé. None of the other authors have financial or personal conflicts to declare.
Ethics approval
We confirm that the study was approved by The Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics of Mid-Norway (REK Central 2015/474) and certify that the study was performed in accordance with the ethical standards as laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments.
Sponsor’s role
The funder had no role in designing the study, in the collection and interpretation of data or in writing the manuscript.
Consent to publish
Patients and proxies signing the consent agreed that data collected in the study would be used for publication.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Evensen, S., Taraldsen, K., Aam, S. et al. Delirium is associated with low levels of upright activity in geriatric inpatients—results from a prospective observational study. Aging Clin Exp Res 36, 41 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-024-02699-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-024-02699-6