Detecting delirium in elderly medical emergency patients: validation and subsequent modification of the German Nursing Delirium Screening Scale

Delirium detection in the emergency department: A diagnostic accuracy meta-analysis of history, physical examination, laboratory tests, and screening instruments

INTRODUCTION

Geriatric emergency department (ED) guidelines emphasize timely identification of delirium. This article updates previous diagnostic accuracy systematic reviews of history, physical examination, laboratory testing, and ED screening instruments for the diagnosis of delirium as well as test-treatment thresholds for ED delirium screening.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review to quantify the diagnostic accuracy of approaches to identify delirium. Studies were included if they described adults aged 60 or older evaluated in the ED setting with an index test for delirium compared with an acceptable criterion standard for delirium. Data were extracted and studies were reviewed for risk of bias. When appropriate, we conducted a meta-analysis and estimated delirium screening thresholds.

RESULTS

Full-text review was performed on 55 studies and 27 were included in the current analysis. No studies were identified exploring the accuracy of findings on history or laboratory analysis. While two studies reported clinicians accurately rule in delirium, clinician gestalt is inadequate to rule out delirium. We report meta-analysis on three studies that quantified the accuracy of the 4 A's Test (4AT) to rule in (pooled positive likelihood ratio [LR+] 7.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.7-20.7) and rule out (pooled negative likelihood ratio [LR-] 0.18, 95% CI 0.09-0.34) delirium. We also conducted meta-analysis of two studies that quantified the accuracy of the Abbreviated Mental Test-4 (AMT-4) and found that the pooled LR+ (4.3, 95% CI 2.4-7.8) was lower than that observed for the 4AT, but the pooled LR- (0.22, 95% CI 0.05-1) was similar. Based on one study the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU) is the superior instrument to rule in delirium. The calculated test threshold is 2% and the treatment threshold is 11%.

CONCLUSIONS

The quantitative accuracy of history and physical examination to identify ED delirium is virtually unexplored. The 4AT has the largest quantity of ED-based research. Other screening instruments may more accurately rule in or rule out delirium. If the goal is to rule in delirium then the CAM-ICU or brief CAM or modified CAM for the ED are superior instruments, although the accuracy of these screening tools are based on single-center studies. To rule out delirium, the Delirium Triage Screen is superior based on one single-center study.

A complex intervention to promote prevention of delirium in older adults by targeting caregiver's participation during and after hospital discharge - study protocol of the TRAnsport and DElirium in older people (TRADE) project

Background

Among potentially modifiable risk factors for delirium, transfers between wards, hospitals and other facilities have been mentioned with low evidence. TRADE (TRAnsport and DElirium in older people) was set up to investigate i) the impact of transfer and/or discharge on the onset of delirium in older adults and ii) feasibility and acceptance of a developed complex intervention targeting caregiver’s participation during and after hospital discharge or transfer on cognition and the onset of delirium in older adults.

Methods

The study is designed according to the guidelines of the UK Medical Research Council (MRC) for development and evaluation of complex interventions and comprises two steps: development and feasibility/piloting. The development phase includes i) a multicenter observational prospective cohort study to assess delirium incidence and cognitive decline associated with transfer and discharge, ii) a systematic review of the literature, iii) stakeholder focus group interviews and iv) an expert workshop followed by a Delphi survey. Based on this information, a complex intervention to better and systematically involve family caregivers in discharge and transport was developed. The intervention will be tested in a pilot study using a stepped wedge design with a detailed process and health economic evaluation. The study is conducted at four acute care hospitals in southwest Germany. Primary endpoints are the delirium incidence and cognitive function. Secondary endpoints include prevalence of caregiver companionship, functional decline, cost and cost effectiveness, quality of discharge management and quality of admission management in admitting hospitals or nursing homes. Data will be collected prior to discharge as well as after 3, 7 and 90 days.

Discussion

TRADE will help to evaluate transfer and discharge as a possible risk factor for delirium. In addition, TRADE evaluates the impact and modifiability of caregiver’s participation during patient’s transfer or discharge on delirium incidence and cognitive decline providing the foundation for a confirmatory implementation study.

Trial registration

DRKS (Deutsches Register für klinische Studien) DRKS00017828. Registered on 17th September 2019. Retrospectively registered.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12877-021-02585-0.

Using the nursing delirium screening scale in assessing postoperative delirium: A meta-regression

The nursing delirium screening scale (Nu-DESC) was developed for the rapid assessment of delirium, but little is known regarding the performance of the Nu-DESC in assessing postoperative delirium. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to review and summarize the evidence of the diagnostic accuracy of the Nu-DESC in assessing postoperative delirium. The EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and a Chinese e-Journal database were searched from the period of the inception of the Nu-DESC to June 18, 2020. Participants were adult (age ≥ 18 years) postoperative patients who received any type of surgery and any method of anesthesia. The quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies-2 was employed to assess the risk of bias among the selected studies, and meta-regression analyses were used to detect sources of between-study heterogeneity. Eleven studies involving 2062 postoperative patients in surgical settings were included. The Nu-DESC revealed a pooled sensitivity of 0.73 (95% confidence interval, 0.44-0.90) and a specificity of 0.93 (0.87-0.96). The area under the summary receiver operating characteristics curve was 0.94 (0.91-0.96), which also confirmed the accuracy of the Nu-DESC. Covariates, including the region of study and the standard reference used, were identified as possible sources of heterogeneity in the meta-regression. The findings of this review can update existing clinical guidelines for postoperative delirium. On the basis of its satisfactory diagnostic performance, we suggest that the Nu-DESC could be considered for nurses and allied health professionals for assessing postoperative delirium. However, because of the heterogeneity, the result of this meta-analysis should be considered with caution.