Attention! A good bedside test for delirium?

Post-Intensive Care Syndrome in Neurocritical Care Patients

Post-intensive care syndrome (PICS) refers to unintended consequences of critical care that manifest as new or worsening impairments in physical functioning, cognitive ability, or mental health. As intensive care unit (ICU) survival continues to improve, PICS is becoming increasingly recognized as a public health problem. Studies that focus on PICS have typically excluded patients with acute brain injuries and chronic neurodegenerative problems. However, patients who require neurocritical care undoubtedly suffer from impairments that overlap substantially with those encompassed by PICS. A major challenge is to distinguish between impairments related to brain injury and those that occur as a consequence of critical care. The general principles for the prevention and management of PICS and multidomain impairments in patients with moderate and severe neurological injuries are similar including the ICU liberation bundle, multidisciplinary team-based care throughout the continuum of care, and increasing awareness regarding the challenges of critical care survivorship among patients, families, and multidisciplinary team members. An extension of this concept, PICS-Family (PICS-F) refers to the mental health consequences of the intensive care experience for families and loved ones of ICU survivors. A dyadic approach to ICU survivorship with an emphasis on recognizing families and caregivers that may be at risk of developing PICS-F after neurocritical care illness can help improve outcomes for ICU survivors. In this review, we will summarize our current understanding of PICS and PICS-F, emerging literature on PICS in severe acute brain injury, strategies for preventing and treating PICS, and share our recommendations for future directions.

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.

Current Trends for Delirium Screening within the Emergency Department

Delirium is an acute neurological disorder that involves attention and cognition. It is associated with a high risk of morbidity and mortality among older people (>65 years old). In the context of the Emergency Department (ED), it is frequently experienced by patients but often not recognized. Literature studies have identified some screening instruments for an initial evaluation of delirium. Most of these tools have not been validated yet in the context of emergencies, but, in other settings, they were very useful for assessing and maximizing the recognition of this condition among older patients. We conducted a review of the literature, including randomized control trials, clinical and observational studies, and research studies published in recent years, confirming that most of the screening tools for delirium used in the intensive care unit (ICU) or the geriatric department have not been tested in the ED, and the ideal timing and form of the delirium assessment process for older adults have not been defined yet. The aim of our review is to summarize the updated evidence about the screening tools for delirium in the context of the ED, due to the fact that overcrowding of the ED and the stressful condition of emergency situations (that contribute to the onset of delirium) could expose older patients to a high risk of complications and mortality if delirium is not promptly recognized. In conclusion, we support the evidence that delirium is a current and real condition that emergency physicians have to face daily, and we are aware that more research is needed to explore this field in order to improve the overall outcomes of older patients admitted to the ED.

Detecting delirium: a systematic review of ultrabrief identification instruments for hospital patients

Objective

Early identification of delirium, which often occurs in older patients, can effectively reduce adverse prognoses. One way to increase the detection rate of delirium is to use an effective ultrabrief instrument for higher-frequency screening. The purpose of this review is to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of ultrabrief screening tools for delirium.

Methods

The Cochrane Library, PubMed and EMBASE were searched from January 1, 1974, to November 31, 2022. We assessed the measurement properties of screening instruments using the consensus-based standards for selecting health measurement instruments (COSMIN) checklist and evaluated the risk bias of the included studies using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool. The diagnostic test accuracy of instruments for delirium was reported using sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR) and negative likelihood ratio (NLR).

Result

Of the 4,914 items identified, 26 met the eligibility criteria, resulting in 5 different delirium identification tools. The overall study quality assessed by the QUADAS-2 tool was moderate to good. Of the five screening tools, two instruments had sensitivity ≥80% and specificities ≥80%: 4AT and UB-2. The most comprehensive is the 4AT scale, which has a sensitivity of 0.80 [95% confidence interval (CI):0.68, 0.88] and a specificity of 0.89 (95%CI: 0.83, 0.93) and contains 4 items. UB-2 has a sensitivity of 0.88 (95%CI: 0.72, 0.96) and a specificity of 0.64 (95%CI: 0.56, 0.70).

Conclusion

UB-2 and MOTYB had excellent sensitivity for delirium screening at an early stage. In terms of sensitivity and intentionality, the 4AT is the best recommended scale.

Recall of delirium and related distress in elderly hospitalized patients: A prospective study

Background: Delirium is a very common neuropsychiatric disorder in the elderly, with a significant physical and psychological burden. Much is still unknown about its psychological effects. This study aims to identify the proportion of patients who recall delirium and to analyze the distress caused by it. In addition, this study aims to analyze the association between delirium recall and related distress and global psychological distress regarding hospitalization. Methods: This is a prospective study with elderly hospitalized patients in level-2 units of intensive care medicine department of a university hospital. Exclusion criteria were a Glasgow Coma Scale total ≤11, brain injury, blindness, deafness, or inability to communicate. Delirium was daily assessed with the Confusion Assessment Method. Delirium recall and related distress in patients were measured using the Delirium Experience Questionnaire. Global psychological distress was assessed with the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale. Results: From 105 patients, 38 (36.2%) developed delirium. Most patients did not remember the delirium episode (64.7%). Among those who remembered (35.3%), most described delirium as a distressing experience (75%). Delirium recall was associated with high global psychological distress (P = .029). Conclusions: Distress related to delirium is high, namely in patients who recall the episode. Global psychological distress during hospitalization is associated with delirium recall. This study highlights the need to assess the experience of delirium in these patients, as well as the importance of providing support and psychological interventions to minimize the associated distress.

Delirium detection methodologies: Implications for outcome measurement in clinical trials in postoperative delirium

OBJECTIVE

Delirium is a common postoperative complication of hip fracture. Various methods exist to detect delirium as a reference standard. The goal of this study was to characterize the properties of the measures obtained in a randomized controlled trial, to document their relationship to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders:Text Revision based diagnosis of postoperative delirium by a consensus panel, and to describe the method in detail to allow replication by others.

METHODS

A secondary analysis of the randomized trial STRIDE (A Strategy to Reduce the Incidence of Postoperative Delirium in Elderly Patients) was conducted. Delirium assessments were performed in 200 consecutive hip fracture repair patients ≥65 years old. Assessors underwent extensive training in delirium assessment and the final delirium diagnosis was adjudicated by a consensus panel of three physicians with expertise in delirium assessment.

RESULTS

A total of 680 consensus panel delirium diagnoses were completed. There were only 19 (2.8%, 19/678) evaluations where the delirium adjudication by the consensus panel differed from delirium findings by the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM). In 16 (84%, 16/19) of the cases, CAM was negative but the consensus panel diagnosed the patient as having delirium based on all of the available information including the CAM.

CONCLUSION

The consensus panel diagnosis was more sensitive compared to CAM alone, however the magnitude of the difference was not large. When assessors are well trained and delirium assessments are closely supervised throughout the study, CAM may be adequate for delirium diagnosis in a clinical trial. Future studies are needed to test this hypothesis.

Comparison of delirium detection tools in acute care : A rapid review

Background

Delirium is a frequent psychopathological syndrome in geriatric patients. It is sometimes the only symptom of acute illness and bears a high risk for complications. Therefore, feasible assessments are needed for delirium detection.

Objective and methods

Rapid review of available delirium assessments based on a current Medline search and cross-reference check with a special focus on those implemented in acute care hospital settings.

Results

A total of 75 delirium detection tools were identified. Many focused on inattention as well as acute onset and/or fluctuating course of cognitive changes as key features for delirium. A range of assessments are based on the confusion assessment method (CAM) that has been adapted for various clinical settings. The need for a collateral history, time resources and staff training are major challenges in delirium assessment. Latest tests address these through a two-step approach, such as the ultrabrief (UB) CAM or by optional assessment of temporal aspects of cognitive changes (4 As test, 4AT). Most delirium screening assessments are validated for patient interviews, some are suitable for monitoring delirium symptoms over time or diagnosing delirium based on collateral history only.

Conclusion

Besides the CAM the 4AT has become well-established in acute care because of its good psychometric properties and practicability. There are several other instruments extending and improving the possibilities of delirium detection in different clinical settings.

Supplementary Information

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00391-021-02003-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Evaluation of Bedside Tests of Attention and Arousal Assessing Delirium in Parkinson's Disease, Dementia, and Older Adults

BACKGROUND

Delirium is a serious acute neuropsychiatric condition associated with altered attention and arousal.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate simple bedside tests for attention and arousal to detect delirium in those with and without Parkinson's disease (PD) and dementia.

METHODS

Participants from two prospective delirium studies were pooled comprising 30 with PD without cognitive impairment, 24 with Lewy body cognitive impairment (PD dementia or dementia with Lewy bodies), 16 with another dementia and 179 PD and dementia-free older adults. Participants completed standardised delirium assessments including tests of attention: digit span, Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale (MDAS) attention and months of the year backwards; and arousal: Glasgow Coma Scale (GSC), Observational Scale of Level of Arousal (OSLA), Modified Richmond Agitation Scale and MDAS consciousness. Delirium was diagnosed using the DSM-5 criteria.

RESULTS

On their first admission, 21.7%participants had prevalent delirium. Arousal measures accurately detected delirium in all participants (p < 0.01 for all), but only selected attention measures detected delirium in PD and dementia. In PD and dementia-free older adults, impaired digit span and OSLA were the optimal tests to detect delirium (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.838, p < 0.001) while in PD and dementia the optimal tests were MDAS attention and GCS (AUC=0.90 and 0.84, respectively, p < 0.001 for both).

CONCLUSION

Simple bedside tests of attention and arousal at a single visit could accurately detect delirium in PD, dementia and PD and dementia-free older adults; however, the optimal tests differed between groups. Combined attention and arousal scores increased accuracy, which could have clinical utility to aid the identification of delirium neurodegenerative disorders.

Diagnostic accuracy and clinical applicability of the Swedish version of the 4AT assessment test for delirium detection, in a mixed patient population and setting

BACKGROUND

Delirium is common in older hospitalized patients. It has serious consequences e.g., poor health outcomes, mortality and increased costs. Despite that, many cases are undetected. Early detection of delirium is important in improving outcomes and use of assessment tools improves detection rates. The 4AT is a brief screening tool for delirium detection, which has not previously been translated into Swedish. The study aim was to evaluate diagnostic accuracy and clinical applicability of a Swedish version of the screening tool 4AT for delirium detection.

METHOD

This diagnostic test accuracy study used a quantitative and a qualitative approach and evaluated the patients' and the health care professionals' experiences of the tool. Study included 200 patients ≥65 years from a university hospital and a county hospital in two Swedish regions. Medical specialties were geriatric stroke/neurology, geriatric multimorbidity, severe cognitive impairment, orthopaedic, and urology. The translated 4AT was tested against the reference standard DSM-IV-TR criteria, based on the Organic Brain Syndrome scale and patient records. The 4AT was assessed simultaneously and independently by two assessors. Additionally, data was collected through patient record reviews, and questions about applicability to the patients (n = 200) and the assessors (n = 37). Statistical analyses, and qualitative content analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

By reference standard 18% had delirium, and by 4AT 19%. The overall percent agreement was 88%, AUROC 0.808, sensitivity 0.70 (95% CI 0.51-0.84) and specificity 0.92 (95% CI 0.87-0.96). In the ward for severe cognitive impairment (n = 63) the 4AT was less sensitive and less specific. In the other wards (n = 132) sensitivity was 0.77 (95% CI 0.50-0.93), specificity 0.93 (95% CI 0.87-0.97), and AUROC 0.848. Interrater reliability (Kappa) was 0.918, p = < 0.001 (n = 144). The 4AT was well tolerated by patients, easy to use for health care professionals, and took a few minutes to conduct.

CONCLUSION

The Swedish version of 4AT is an accurate and applicable tool to use in clinical practice for detecting delirium in hospitalized patients across different medical specialities, and to use by different professionals and levels of seniority. To improve patient outcomes, we recommend the 4AT to be incorporated in clinical practice in health care settings in Sweden.

Screening of community-dwelling older patients by the emergency medical services: An observational retrospective registry study

BACKGROUND

Inadequate nutrition, falls, and cognitive impairment are common problems among acutely ill older people and are associated with complicated and prolonged health problems and mortality.

OBJECTIVES

To assess if the emergency medical services can identify patients with nutritional risk, falls risk, and cognitive impairment by using simple screening tools and to assess the prevalence of risks and rate they are reported to the emergency department.

SETTING

The study was carried out in Espoo, Finland to patients over the age of 70 requiring non-urgent ambulance transfer to the emergency department.

OUTCOME MEASURES

A set of validated electronic screening tools was used to identify patients at nutritional risk, risk of falling and having cognitive impairment.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 488 (8%) out of 5792 patients were screened. Of the patients 60%, (n = 292) had at least one risk: 17% (n = 81) had nutritional risk, 43% (n = 209) falls risk, and 28% (n = 137) cognitive impairment. Twenty-two (5%) were screened positive in all three categories. The observed risk was reported to the emergency department staff in 59% (n = 173) of the patients.

CONCLUSION

The emergency medical services can be used in preventive health care to identify patients having nutritional risk, falls risk, or cognitive impairment.

Development of the AL-O-A Score for Delirium Screening in Acute Internal Medicine: a Monocentric Prospective Study

BACKGROUND

Delirium occurs frequently in acute internal medicine wards and may worsen the patient's prognosis; it deserves a fast, systematic screening tool.

OBJECTIVE

Develop a delirium screening score for inpatients admitted to acute internal medicine wards.

DESIGN

A monocentric prospective study between November 2019 and January 2020.

PARTICIPANTS

Two hundred and seventeen adult inpatients.

MAIN MEASURES

Within 48 h of hospital admission, physicians administered an index test to participants which explored potential predictors associated with the fluctuation of mental state, inattention, disorganised thinking and altered level of consciousness. On the same day, patients underwent a neuropsychological evaluation (reference standard) to assess for delirium. The score was constructed using a backward stepwise logistic regression strategy. Areas under the receiver operating curves (AUC) and calibration curves were drawn to calculate the score's performance. The score was tested on subgroups determined by age, sex and cognitive status.

RESULTS

The AL-O-A score ("abnormal or fluctuating ALertness, temporospatial Orientation and off-target Answers") showed excellent apparent (AUC 0.95 (95% CI 0.91-0.99)) and optimism-corrected discrimination (AUC 0.92 (95% CI 0.89-0.96)). It performed equally well in subgroups with and without cognitive impairment (AUC 0.93 (95% CI 0.88-0.99) vs 0.92 (95% CI 0.80-0.99)); in men and women (AUC 0.96 (95% CI 0.94-0.99) vs 0.95 (95% CI 0.89-0.99)); and in patients younger and older than 75 years old (AUC 0.98 (95% CI 0.95-0.99) vs 0.93 (95% CI 0.87-0.99)).

CONCLUSIONS

A simple, 1-min screening test (AL-O-A score), even administered by an untrained professional, can identify delirium in internal medicine patients.

Comparing performance on the Months of the Year Backwards test in hospitalised patients with delirium, dementia, and no cognitive impairment: an exploratory study

Aim

To investigate performance of the Months of the Year Backwards (MOTYB) test in older hospitalised patients with delirium, dementia, and no cognitive impairment.

Findings

Half of the patients with delirium (46%) could not engage with MOTYB compared to only 11% of patients with dementia without delirium. In patients able to give responses, those with delirium or dementia performed significantly worse than those without cognitive impairment.

Message

Our findings show the potential value of analysing response patterns, especially initial engagement, self-correction, and ability to continue to do the task in addition to considering exclusively the capacity to correctly recite the months until July, June or January.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s41999-021-00521-4.

Purpose

To investigate performance of the Months of the Year Backwards (MOTYB) test in older hospitalised patients with delirium, dementia, and no cognitive impairment.

Methods

Secondary analysis of data from a case–control study of 149 hospitalised patients aged ≥ 65 years with delirium [with or without dementia (N = 50)], dementia [without delirium (N = 46)], and no cognitive impairment (N = 53). Verbatim transcripts of MOTYB audio recordings were analysed to determine group differences in response patterns.

Results

In the total sample [median age 85y (IQR 80–88), 82% female], patients with delirium were more often unable to recite months backward to November (36/50 = 72%) than patients with dementia (21/46 = 46%; p < 0.01) and both differed significantly from patients without cognitive impairment (2/53 = 4%; p’s < 0.001). 121/149 (81%) of patients were able to engage with the test. Patients with delirium were more often unable to engage with MOTYB (23/50 = 46%; e.g., due to reduced arousal) than patients with dementia (5/46 = 11%; p < 0.001); both groups differed significantly (p’s < 0.001) from patients without cognitive impairment (0/53 = 0%). There was no statistically significant difference between patients with delirium (2/27 = 7%) and patients with dementia (8/41 = 20%) in completing MOTYB to January, but performance in both groups differed (p < 0.001 and p < 0.02, respectively) from patients without cognitive impairment (35/53 = 66%).

Conclusion

Delirium was associated with inability to engage with MOTYB and low rates of completion. In patients able to engage with the test, error-free completion rates were low in delirium and dementia. Recording of engagement and patterns of errors may add useful information to MOTYB scoring.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s41999-021-00521-4.

The Prevention of Delirium system of care for older patients admitted to hospital for emergency care: the POD research programme including feasibility RCT

Background

Delirium is a distressing, common and serious condition in older people in hospital. Evidence suggests that it could be prevented in about one-third of patients using multicomponent interventions targeting delirium risk factors, but these interventions are not yet routinely available in the NHS.

Objective

The objective was to improve delirium prevention for older people admitted to the NHS.

Design

Project 1 comprised case studies employing qualitative methods (observation, interviews, workshops) in three NHS hospitals to develop the Prevention of Delirium system of care. Project 2 comprised case studies using mixed methods in five NHS hospitals to test the Prevention of Delirium implementation, feasibility and acceptability, and to modify the Prevention of Delirium system of care. Project 3 comprised a multicentre, cluster randomised, controlled, pragmatic feasibility study in eight hospitals, with embedded economic evaluation, to investigate the potential clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the Prevention of Delirium system of care, compared with standard care, among older patients admitted to hospital for emergency care. The primary objectives related to gathering information to design a definitive trial. Criteria for progression to a definitive trial were as follows: a minimum of six wards (75%) completing the Prevention of Delirium manual milestone checklist and an overall recruitment rate of at least 10% of the potential recruitment pool.

Setting

This study was set in NHS general hospitals.

Participants

In project 1, participants were staff, volunteers, and patient and carer representatives. In project 2, participants were staff, volunteers, patients and carers. In project 3, participants were older patients admitted to elderly care and orthopaedic trauma wards.

Intervention

The developed intervention (i.e. the Prevention of Delirium system of care).

Main outcome measures

For the feasibility study (project 3), the primary outcome measure was the Confusion Assessment Method. The secondary outcome measures were the Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living scale, the Clinical Anxiety Scale and the Geriatric Depression Scale Short Form.

Results

Project 1: understanding of delirium prevention was poor. Drawing on evidence, and working with ward teams, we developed the Prevention of Delirium system of care, which targeted 10 delirium risk factors. This multicomponent intervention incorporated systems and mechanisms to introduce and embed delirium prevention into routine ward practices. Project 2: five out of six wards implemented or partially implemented the Prevention of Delirium intervention. A prominent role for hospital volunteers was intended, but most wards were unable to recruit or sustain the numbers needed. We identified four conditions necessary to implement and deliver the Prevention of Delirium intervention: (1) commitment of senior nurse, (2) a named person to drive implementation forward, (3) dedicated time (1 day per week) of an experienced nurse to lead implementation and (4) adequate ward staffing levels. Overall, the intervention was acceptable to staff, volunteers, patients and carers, and did not increase nursing staff workload. In the light of these findings, the Prevention of Delirium system of care was modified for use in project 3. Project 3: 16 wards in eight hospitals (two wards per hospital) were recruited. Out of 4449 patients screened, 3274 (73.6%) were eligible and 713 were registered, resulting in a recruitment rate of 16.0%. Thirty-three (4.6%) participants withdrew. The screened and registered participants were similar, but some between-treatment group imbalances were noted among those registered to the trial. All eight wards allocated to the intervention group completed the Prevention of Delirium manual milestone checklist and delivered the Prevention of Delirium intervention (median time 18.6 weeks for implementation). Overall, fidelity to the intervention was assessed as being high in two wards, medium in five wards and low in one ward. Of the expected 5645 Confusion Assessment Method delirium assessments, 5065 (89.7%) were completed during the first 10 days of admission. The rates of return of the patient-reported questionnaire booklets were 98.0% at baseline, 81.8% at 30 days and 70.5% at 3 months. The return rate of the EuroQol-5 Dimensions questionnaire was 98.6% at baseline, 77.5% at 1 month and 65.3% at 3 months (94–98% fully completed). The completion rate of the resource use questionnaire was lower (48.7%). The number of people with new-onset delirium at 10 days was 24 (7.0%) in the Prevention of Delirium group and 33 (8.9%) in the control group. Multilevel logistic regression analysis showed that participants in the Prevention of Delirium group had non-significant lower odds of developing delirium (odds ratio 0.68, 95% confidence interval 0.37 to 1.26; p = 0.2225). The average cost of the Prevention of Delirium intervention was estimated as £10.98 per patient and the mean costs for the Prevention of Delirium and usual-care groups were £5332 and £4412, respectively, with negligible between-group differences in quality-adjusted life-years. There was conflicting evidence from the trial- and model-based analyses relating to the cost-effectiveness of the Prevention of Delirium intervention. Given this, and in view of issues with the data (e.g. high levels of missingness), the results from the economic evaluation are highly uncertain. The criteria for continuation to a future definitive randomised controlled trial were met. Such a trial would need to recruit 5200 patients in 26 hospital clusters (200 patients per cluster).

Conclusions

The Prevention of Delirium system of care was successfully developed, and a multicentre feasibility study showed that the intervention is capable of implementation and delivery in routine care, with acceptable intervention fidelity and preliminary estimate of effectiveness.

Limitations

A prominent role for volunteers was originally intended in the Prevention of Delirium system of care, but only three of the eight wards allocated to the trial intervention group involved volunteers.

Future work

The findings indicate that a definitive multicentre evaluation of the Prevention of Delirium system of care should be designed and conducted to obtain robust estimates of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN28213290 (project 1), ISRCTN65924234 (project 2) and ISRCTN01187372 (project 3).

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 9, No. 4. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Consciousness and the rabbit holes of delirium

Delirium is a common disorder in hospitalized older adults and the defining characteristic is a disturbance of consciousness. Unfortunately, there are currently no testable measures of consciousness as pertains to its disruption in delirium. Not surprisingly rates of recognition of delirium suffer. Arguably, a greater understanding of the quantum of consciousness may improve delirium diagnosis through better diagnostic tools. Candidate dimensions of consciousness derived from fields of psychology, psychiatry, and philosophy are discussed and relevance to delirium explored. Based upon existing literature in the field of consciousness we identify the pre-reflective state, experiential awareness, and functional networks as candidate sites that may be affected in delirium. Opportunities for clinical instrument development and how these tools can be tested are discussed. We conclude that consciousness content may not hold to a unitary measurement, but facets of its integrity that are impacted in delirium are open to further exploration. Disorders in pre-reflective status, experiential awareness, and functional networks may represent the measurable "rabbit holes" of consciousness disturbance.

Approach to Cognitive Impairment in Parkinson's Disease

Cognitive dysfunction is common in Parkinson's disease (PD) and predicts poor clinical outcomes. It is associated primarily with pathologic involvement of basal forebrain cholinergic and prefrontal dopaminergic systems. Impairments in executive functions, attention, and visuospatial abilities are its hallmark features with eventual involvement of memory and other domains. Subtle symptoms in the premotor and early phases of PD progress to mild cognitive impairment (MCI) which may be present at the time of diagnosis. Eventually, a large majority of PD patients develop dementia with advancing age and longer disease duration, which is usually accompanied by immobility, hallucinations/psychosis, and dysautonomia. Dopaminergic medications and deep brain stimulation help motor dysfunction, but may have potential cognitive side effects. Central acetylcholinesterase inhibitors, and possibly memantine, provide modest and temporary symptomatic relief for dementia, although there is no evidence-based treatment for MCI. There is no proven disease-modifying treatment for cognitive impairment in PD. The symptomatic and disease-modifying role of physical exercise, cognitive training, and neuromodulation on cognitive impairment in PD is under investigation. Multidisciplinary approaches to cognitive impairment with effective treatment of comorbidities, proper rehabilitation, and maintenance of good support systems in addition to pharmaceutical treatment may improve the quality of life of the patients and caregivers.

A multicentre, pragmatic, cluster randomised, controlled feasibility trial of the POD system of care

OBJECTIVE

to provide a preliminary estimate of the effectiveness of the prevention of delirium (POD) system of care in reducing incident delirium in acute hospital wards and gather data for a future definitive randomised controlled trial.

DESIGN

cluster randomised and controlled feasibility trial.

SETTING

sixteen acute care of older people and orthopaedic trauma wards in eight hospitals in England and Wales.

PARTICIPANTS

patients 65 years and over admitted to participating wards during the trial period.

INTERVENTIONS

participating wards were randomly assigned to either the POD programme or usual care, determined by existing local policies and practices. The POD programme is a manualised multicomponent delirium prevention intervention that targets 10 risk factors for delirium. The intervention wards underwent a 6-month implementation period before trial recruitment commenced. Main outcome measure incidence of new-onset delirium measured using the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) measured daily for up to 10 days post consent.

RESULTS

out of 4449, 3274 patients admitted to the wards were eligible. In total, 714 patients consented (713 registered) to the trial, thirty-three participants (4.6%) withdrew. Adherence to the intervention was classified as at least medium for seven wards. Rates of new-onset delirium were lower than expected and did not differ between groups (24 (7.0%) of participants in the intervention group versus 33 (8.9%) in the control group; odds ratio (95% confidence interval) 0.68 (0.37-1.26); P = 0.2225).

CONCLUSIONS

based on these findings, a definitive trial is achievable and would need to recruit 5220 patients in 26 two-ward hospital clusters. Trial registration: ISRCTN01187372. Registered 13 March 2014.

Comparison of novel tools with traditional cognitive tests in detecting delirium in elderly medical patients

BACKGROUND

Efficient detection of delirium and comorbid delirium-dementia is a key diagnostic challenge. Development of new, efficient delirium-focused methods of cognitive assessment is a key challenge for improved detection of neurocognitive disorders in everyday clinical practice.

AIM

To compare the accuracy of two novel bedside tests of attention, vigilance and visuospatial function with conventional bedside cognitive tests in identifying delirium in older hospitalized patients.

METHODS

180 consecutive elderly medical inpatients (mean age 79.6 ± 7.2; 51% female) referred to a psychiatry for later life consultation-liaison service with delirium, dementia, comorbid delirium-dementia and cognitively intact controls. Participants were assessed cross-sectionally with conventional bedside cognitive tests [WORLD, Months Backward test (MBT), Spatial span, Vigilance A and B, Clock Drawing test and Interlocking Pentagons test] and two novel cognitive tests [Lighthouse test, Letter and Shape Drawing test (LSD)-4].

RESULTS

Neurocognitive diagnoses were delirium (n = 44), dementia (n = 30), comorbid delirium-dementia (n = 60) and no neurocognitive disorder (n = 46). All conventional tests had sensitivity of > 70% for delirium, with best overall accuracy for the Vigilance-B (78.3%), Vigilance-A (77.8%) and MBT (76.7%) tests. The sustained attention component of the Lighthouse test was the most distinguishing of delirium (sensitivity 84.6%; overall accuracy 75.6%). The LSD-4 had sensitivity of 74.0% and overall accuracy 74.4% for delirium identification. Combining tests allowed for enhanced sensitivity (> 90%) and overall accuracy (≥ 75%) with the highest overall accuracy for the combination of MBT-Vigilance A and the combined Vigilance A and B tests (both 78.3%). When analyses were repeated for those with dementia, there were similar findings with the MBT-Vigilance A the most accurate overall combination (80.0%). Combining the Lighthouse-SA with the LSD-4, a fail in either test had sensitivity for delirium of 91.4 with overall accuracy of 74.4%.

CONCLUSION

Bedside tests of attention, vigilance and visuospatial ability can help to distinguish neurocognitive disorders, including delirium, from other presentations. The Lighthouse test and the LSD-4 are novel tests with high accuracy for detecting delirium.

The relationship among frailty, delirium and attentional tests to detect delirium: a cohort study

BACKGROUND

Few studies explored if frailty predisposes to delirium in hospitalized older patients. The aims of this study were to evaluate if frailty: 1) is independently associated with delirium, and 2) affects the patient's performance in three tests of attention used to detect delirium.

METHODS

Data are from a prospective cohort study of patients admitted to an Acute Geriatric Unit (AGU). Frailty was operationalized using the health deficit accumulation model (38-item Frailty Index). Delirium was screened using the 4AT, and the diagnosis confirmed with the DSM-5th criteria. During the first 7 days from the hospital admission, patients also underwent a double-blind assessment of attention using three ad hoc tests (i.e., Months of the year backwards, MOTYB; Days of the week backwards, DOWB; and Count backwards from 20 to 1, CB).

RESULTS

Eighty-nine patients were included (mean age 83.1 years, standard deviation 6.0). Forty-two (47.19%) patients were frail, and 37 (41.7%) had delirium. The likelihood of delirium was significantly higher in frail compared to the non-frail patients; it was also inversely associated with the three attention tests. Using the MOTYB test, the ability to discriminate delirium was similar in patients with (Area Under the Receiving Operator Characteristic [AUROC] 0.88, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 0.82-0.92) and without frailty (AUROC 0.93, 95%CI 0.90-0.95) whilst was markedly different between the same groups using either DOWB and CB.

CONCLUSIONS

Frailty is associated with delirium in hospitalized older patients and can influence the patient's performances at attentional tests that are commonly used to screen delirium.

Diagnosing delirium in patients with dementia, a great challenge

Delirium, despite its high incidence, serious consequences and potential reversibility, remains an underdiagnosed syndrome. In patients with dementia, the healthcare professional may find significant difficulties in differentiating whether the patient presents cognitive alterations and behavioural disorders characteristic of dementia or, on the contrary, is faced with a delirium superimposed on dementia (DSD). In view of this difficulty, many tools have been proposed in recent years to improve the diagnosis of DSD in these highly complex patients. The aim of these tools is to be easy and quick to apply, and although focusing on assessing cognitive aspects such as attention or level of consciousness, some of them have also incorporated the assessment of other more novel aspects, such as the ability to respond to external stimuli (Arousal) or the degree of mobility.

Selecting a Bedside Cognitive Vital Sign to Monitor Cognition in Hospital: Feasibility, Reliability, and Responsiveness of Logical Memory

Although there is a high prevalence of delirium and cognitive impairment among hospitalised older adults, short, reliable cognitive measures are rarely used to monitor cognition and potentially alert healthcare professionals to early changes that might signal delirium. We evaluated the reliability, responsiveness, and feasibility of logical memory (LM), immediate verbal recall of a short story, compared to brief tests of attention as a bedside “cognitive vital sign” (CVS). Trained nursing staff performed twice-daily cognitive assessments on 84 clinically stable inpatients in two geriatric units over 3–5 consecutive days using LM and short tests of attention and orientation including months of the year backwards. Scores were compared to those of an expert rater. Inter-rater reliability was excellent with correlation coefficients for LM increasing from r = 0.87 on day 1 to r = 0.97 by day 4 (p < 0.0001). A diurnal fluctuation of two points from a total of 30 was deemed acceptable in clinically stable patients. LM scores were statistically similar (p = 0.98) with repeated testing (suggesting no learning effect). All nurses reported that LM was feasible to score routinely. LM is a reliable measure of cognition showing diurnal variation but minimal learning effects. Further study is required to define the properties of an ideal CVS test, though LM may satisfy these.

Delirium in the intensive care setting dependent on the Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale (RASS): Inattention and visuo-spatial impairment as potential screening domains

OBJECTIVE

In the intensive care setting, delirium is a common occurrence; however, the impact of the level of alertness has never been evaluated. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the delirium characteristics in the drowsy, as well as the alert and calm patient.

METHOD

In this prospective cohort study, 225 intensive care patients with Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale (RASS) scores of -1 - drowsy and 0 - alert and calm were evaluated with the Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-1998 (DRS-R-98) and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual 4th edition text revision (DSM-IV-TR)-determined diagnosis of delirium.

RESULTS

In total, 85 drowsy and 140 alert and calm patients were included. Crucial items for the correct identification of delirium were sleep-wake cycle disturbances, language abnormalities, thought process alterations, psychomotor retardation, disorientation, inattention, short- and long-term memory, as well as visuo-spatial impairment, and the temporal onset. Conversely, perceptual disturbances, delusions, affective lability, psychomotor agitation, or fluctuations were items, which identified delirium less correctly. Further, the severities of inattentiveness and visuo-spatial impairment were indicative of delirium in both alert- or calmness and drowsiness.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

The impairment in the cognitive domain, psychomotor retardation, and sleep-wake cycle disturbances correctly identified delirium irrespective of the level alertness. Further, inattentiveness and - to a lesser degree - visuo-spatial impairment could represent a specific marker for delirium in the intensive care setting meriting further evaluation.

Ultra-brief Screeners for Detecting Delirium Superimposed on Dementia

OBJECTIVE

Delirium superimposed on dementia (DSD) is common, morbid, and costly, yet frequently undiagnosed. Our study aimed to develop a brief screening test to improve health care worker recognition of DSD.

DESIGN/SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Older hospitalized adults with dementia were prospectively enrolled from medical and surgical inpatient units of 3 hospitals (2 in Pennsylvania, 1 in Tennessee).

MEASURES

The reference standard delirium assessment used Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) criteria and was based on a structured interview including the Mini-Mental State Examination, interviewer observations, and medical record review. To develop the screening test, 1-, 2-, and 3-item combinations from the reference standard assessment were analyzed to determine their sensitivity and specificity in diagnosing delirium presence in a dementia population compared to the reference standard. For multiple-item screeners, error on 1 or more items was considered a positive screen.

RESULTS

Overall, 391 older adults with dementia were enrolled (mean age: 83.9 years, 71.1% female), and 95 (24.4%) developed DSD during their hospitalization, based on the reference standard. The best single-item screen for DSD was "What day of the week is it?" with 84% sensitivity [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.75, 0.91] and 41% specificity (CI: 0.35, 0.47). The best 2-item screen was "list the days of the week backwards" and "What day of the week is it?" with 93% sensitivity (CI: 0.85, 0.97) and 30% specificity (CI: 0.25, 0.36). The best 3-item screen was "list the days of the week backwards," "What type of place is this? [hospital]" and "Does the patient appear sleepy?" with 94% sensitivity (CI: 0.87, 0.98) and 42% specificity (CI: 0.36, 0.48).

CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS

We identified a 3-item DSD screener with excellent sensitivity but limited specificity. This screener can be used to quickly rule out DSD in populations with a high prevalence of dementia and is a promising step toward developing efficient tools for DSD recognition among care providers.

Impact of an educational workshop upon psychiatrists' attitudes towards delirium care

OBJECTIVES

Improving knowledge about delirium care is a key target for health care. We describe the implementation of a four-part workshop focusing upon key aspects of delirium care.

METHODS

Attitudes towards and understanding of delirium diagnosis and management amongst psychiatrists were surveyed before and immediately after an educational workshop.

RESULTS

There were 62 participants. Pre-workshop, delirium was rated highly relevant to psychiatry. Overall level of confidence in diagnosis was modest, with the behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia considered the most challenging differential diagnosis. Only nine participants (15%) correctly identified DSM-5 delirium criteria. Preferred assessment of attention varied with six different approaches endorsed. Confidence was higher for managing hyperactive compared with hypoactive delirium (p&lt;0.001). Pharmacotherapy was more frequently endorsed for hyperactive compared with hypoactive presentations, with haloperidol the most popular agent (p&lt;0.001). A total of 41 (66%) participants completed post-workshop assessments. Post-workshop, there were significant increases to the perceived relevance of delirium (p = 0.003), confidence in overall diagnosis (p&lt;0.001) accuracy of awareness of DSM-5 criteria (p&lt;0.001), and confidence in treating different presentations (p&lt;0.001). The Months Backward Test was the preferred bedside test of attention (38/40 respondents).

CONCLUSIONS

This interactive educational intervention impacted positively upon knowledge and attitudes amongst psychiatrists towards key aspects of delirium care. Further investigation can examine the impact upon longer term knowledge and behaviour.

Use of the confusion assessment method in multicentre delirium trials: training and standardisation

Background

Delirium occurs commonly in older adults and is associated with adverse outcomes. Multicentre clinical trials evaluating interventions to prevent delirium are needed. The Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) is a validated instrument for delirium detection. We hypothesised it would be possible for a large feasibility study to train a large number of research assistants, with varying experience levels, to conduct CAM assessments reliably in multiple hospital sites.

Methods

A standardised training programme was followed, incorporating structured training at a central location and at study sites. CAM practice sessions on both delirious and non-delirious patients by research assistants were conducted and, thereafter, there was ongoing inter-rater reliability assessment on the CAM between research assistant pairs at study sites. The setting was eight acute care hospitals in England and Wales. Participants were research assistants working on a multicentre feasibility study of delirium prevention. The measurement used was the Confusion Assessment Method.

Results

Thirty-seven research assistants were trained in CAM assessment and 33 returned training logs. The logs showed there was 100% overall agreement between research assistant pairs on 295 CAM assessments, of which 263 (89.2%) were negative for delirium and 32 (10.8%) were positive. In the course of the feasibility study, research assistants successfully completed 5065 (89.7%) of the 5645 expected CAM assessments, with minimal missing data.

Conclusion

Using the training methods described in this study, it is possible to achieve high quality delirium assessments for large numbers of patients with little missing data across geographically dispersed sites in multicentre studies. The standardisation of multisite delirium assessments is an important contribution to research methodology, and provides a much-needed advance for the field.

Trial registration

ISRCT ISRCTN01187372. Registered 13 March 2014.

Role of Epileptic Activity in Older Adults With Delirium, a Prospective Continuous EEG Study

Background/Objectives: Delirium occurs in up to 50 % of hospitalized old patients and is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Acute medical conditions favor delirium, but the pathophysiology is unclear. Preliminary evidence from retrospective and prospective studies suggests that a substantial minority of old patients with unexplained delirium have non-convulsive seizures or status epilepticus (NCSE). Yet, seeking epileptic activity only in unexplained cases of delirium might result in misinterpretation of its actual prevalence. We aimed to systematically investigate the role of epileptic activity in all older patients with delirium regardless of the underlying etiology.

Design, Setting: Prospective observational study in a tertiary medical center. Adults >65 years with delirium underwent at least 24 h of continuous electro-encephalographic monitoring (cEEG). Background patterns and ictal and interictal epileptic discharges were identified, as well as clinical and biological characteristics.

Participants: Fifty patients were included in the study.

Results: NCSE was found in 6 (12%) patients and interictal discharges in 15 (30%). There was no difference in the prevalence of epileptic activity rates between delirium associated with an acute medical condition and delirium of unknown etiology.

Conclusion: Epileptic activity may play a substantial role in the pathophysiology of delirium by altering brain functioning and neuronal metabolism. No clinical or biological marker was found to distinguish delirious patients with or without epileptic activity, underlining the importance of cEEG in this context.

Delirium Assessment in Older People in Emergency Departments. A Literature Review

Delirium is a neuropsychiatric syndrome often manifesting in acute disease conditions, and with a greater prevalence in the older generation. Delirium in the Emergency Department (ED) is a highly prevalent problem that typically goes unnoticed by healthcare providers. The onset of a delirium episode in the ED is associated with an increase in morbidity and mortality. Because delirium is a preventable syndrome, these statistics are unacceptable. Emergency Department staff therefore should strive to perform systematic screening in order to detect delirium. Different tools have been developed for the assessment of delirium by healthcare professionals other than psychiatrists or geriatricians. Emergency Departments require delirium assessment scales of high sensitivity and specificity, suited to the characteristics of the Department, since the time available is scarce. In addition, the presence of dementia in the assessment of delirium may induce sensitivity bias. Despite the existence of numerous delirium rating scales, scales taking less than three minutes to complete are recommended. The choice of the tool depends on the characteristics of the ED. The only scale affording high sensitivity and specificity in older people with and without dementia is the Four "A"s Test (4AT); it requires no training on the part of the rater, and can be performed in under two minutes.

Autonomic cardiovascular control in older patients with acute infection and delirium: a pilot study of orthostatic stress responses

BACKGROUND

Alterations in autonomic nervous system (ANS) activity might be involved in the pathophysiology of delirium. The aim was to explore autonomic cardiovascular control in older patients with and without delirium.

METHODS

Fourteen patients (five with delirium) acutely admitted to the geriatric ward with an infection were enrolled in the study. Patients with atrial fibrillation, a pacemaker, or on treatment with beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers or acetylcholinesterase inhibitors were not eligible. Continuous, non-invasive hemodynamic variables were measured during supine rest (5 min) and head-up tilt (HUT) to 15 degrees (10 min). Heart rate (HR), blood pressure (BP) and stroke volume (SV) were recorded beat-to-beat. Cardiac output (CO), total peripheral resistance (TPR), end-diastolic volume (EDV) and heart rate variability (HRV) values were calculated.

RESULTS

Median age was 86 years. HR, BP, SV, CO, TPR and EDV were similar across the two groups at rest, but there was a trend towards a greater increase in systolic BP and HR during HUT in the delirium group. At rest, all HRV indices were higher in the delirium group, but the differences were not statistically significant. During HUT, the delirium group had higher power spectral density (PSD) (representing total variability) (p = 0.06) and a lower low frequency (LF)/high frequency (HF)-ratio (an index of sympathovagal balance) than the control group (p = 0.06). Also, delirious patients had a significantly greater reduction in standard deviation of RR-intervals (SDNN) (representing total variability) from baseline than controls (p = 0.01) during HUT.

CONCLUSIONS

This explorative pilot study on autonomic cardiovascular control in delirium suggests that there may be differences in HRV that should be further investigated in larger samples.

Delirium in medical intensive care units: Incidence, subtypes, risk factors, and outcome

BACKGROUND

Delirium is a frequent yet underdiagnosed neuropsychiatric condition encountered in intensive care units (ICUs). Being both a preventable and potentially reversible process associated with significant morbidity and mortality, understanding risk factors that predispose and precipitate delirium in any given patient are critical in ICUs.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to evaluate the incidence, motor subtypes, risk factors, and clinical outcome of delirium in the medical ICU.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We used a prospective study design on a cohort of consecutive medical ICU admissions of a tertiary care teaching hospital. The Confusion Assessment Method-ICU and Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale were used to diagnose and motor subtype delirium, respectively, along with a checklist to assess risk factors.

RESULTS

Of the 280 ICU admissions, 88 (31.4%) developed delirium. Hypoactive delirium was the most common motor subtype (55.7%). The detection rate of delirium was 12.5% (lowest for hypoactive delirium at 2.04%). Age, gender, and years of education did not significantly predict delirium (all P > 0.05). Tobacco use, chronic liver disease, and past episodes of delirium significantly predisposed, while mechanical ventilation, hypoxia, fever, raised levels of bilirubin and creatinine, and benzodiazepine administration significantly precipitated ICU delirium. Delirium was significantly associated with longer ICU stay (t = 4.23, P = 0.000) and 1-month postdischarge mortality (χ ² = 6.867, P = 0.009).

CONCLUSION

Detection of delirium is challenging, especially in ICU patients on mechanical ventilation and hypoactive delirium. Screening and monitoring for predisposing and precipitating risk factors can greatly improve the odds of detection and intervention as ICU delirium is associated with significant morbidity and mortality.

The neuropsychology of delirium: advancing the science of delirium assessment

OBJECTIVE

The diagnosis of delirium depends on eliciting its features through mental status examination and informant history. However, there is marked heterogeneity in how these features are assessed, from binary subjective clinical judgement to more comprehensive methods supported by cognitive testing. The aim of this article is to review the neuropsychological research in delirium and suggest future directions in research and clinical practice.

METHODS

We reviewed the neuropsychological literature on formal assessment and quantification of the different domains in delirium, focusing on the core feature of inattention.

RESULTS

Few studies have characterised and quantified the features of delirium using objective methods commonly employed in neuropsychological research. The existing evidence confirms that patients with delirium usually show impairments on objective tests of attention compared with cognitively intact controls and, in most cases, compared with patients with dementia. Further, abnormal level of arousal appears to be a specific indicator of delirium. The neuropsychological evidence base for impairments in other cognitive domains in delirium, including visual perception, language and thought processes, is small.

CONCLUSIONS

Delirium diagnosis requires accurate testing for its features, but there is little neuropsychological research examining the nature of these features, or evaluating the reliability, validity and discriminatory power of existing assessment processes. More research using the neuropsychological approach has enormous potential to improve and standardise delirium assessment methods of the individual features of delirium, such as inattention, and in developing more robust reference standards to enable greater comparability between studies.

Validation of the Brief Confusion Assessment Method for Screening Delirium in Elderly Medical Patients in a German Emergency Department

BACKGROUND

Delirium is frequent in elderly patients presenting in the emergency department (ED). Despite the severe prognosis, the majority of delirium cases remain undetected by emergency physicians (EPs). At the time of our study there was no valid delirium screening tool available for EDs in German-speaking regions. We aimed to evaluate the brief Confusion Assessment Method (bCAM) for a German ED during the daily work routine.

METHODS

We implemented the bCAM into practice in a German interdisciplinary high-volume ED and evaluated the bCAM's validity in a convenience sample of medical patients aged ≥ 70 years. The bCAM, which assesses four core features of delirium, was performed by EPs during their daily work routine and compared to a criterion standard based on the criteria for delirium as described in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition.

RESULTS

Compared to the criterion standard, delirium was found to be present in 46 (16.0%) of the 288 nonsurgical patients enrolled. The bCAM showed 93.8% specificity (95% confidence interval [CI] = 90.0%-96.5%) and 65.2% sensitivity (95% CI = 49.8%-78.7%). Positive and negative likelihood ratios were 10.5 and 0.37, respectively, while the odds ratio was 28.4. Delirium was missed in 10 of 16 cases, since the bCAM did not indicate altered levels of consciousness and disorganized thinking. The level of agreement with the criterion standard increased for patients with low cognitive performance.

CONCLUSION

This was the first study evaluating the bCAM for a German ED and when performed by EPs during routine work. The bCAM showed good specificity, but only moderate sensitivity. Nevertheless, application of the bCAM most likely improves the delirium detection rate in German EDs. However, it should only be applied by trained physicians to maximize diagnostic accuracy and hence improve the bCAM's sensitivity. Future studies should refine the bCAM.

Attention, arousal and other rapid bedside screening instruments for delirium in older patients: a systematic review of test accuracy studies

Objective

delirium occurs frequently in frail patients but is easily missed. Screening with a rapid, easy-to-use and highly sensitive instrument might help improve recognition. The aim of this study was to review attention, arousal and other rapid bedside screening instruments for delirium in older patients.

Methods

a literature search was performed in PubMed, PsycINFO and Embase. We scrutinized forward citations in Google Scholar, and references of included articles and prior reviews. We included studies among older patients that investigated the sensitivity and specificity of delirium screening instruments that could be administered in 3 min or less, and did not require surrogate information. We extracted study characteristics, risk of bias, sensitivity and specificity.

Results

we identified 27 studies among 4,766 patients in hospitals and nursing homes. They tested many different single and several combined screening instruments. Prevalence of delirium varied between 4% and 57%. Only one study scored a low risk of bias on all domains. Sensitivity varied between 17% and 100%, and specificity between 38% and 99%. Of the 22 tests with sensitivity ≥90%, seven also had specificity ≥80% in older patients in general. These results were approximately reproduced for the Observational Scale of Level of Arousal (OSLA) and Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale (RASS): sensitivity and specificity were >80%.

Conclusion

two arousal tests-OSLA and RASS-had reproduced high sensitivity and specificity in older patients. Nurses can administer these tests during daily interaction with patients. Test accuracy studies about rapid screening tools for delirium superimposed on dementia were scarce.

Focusing on Inattention: The Diagnostic Accuracy of Brief Measures of Inattention for Detecting Delirium

BACKGROUND

Delirium is frequently missed in most clinical settings. Brief delirium assessments are needed.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of reciting the months of year backwards (MOTYB) from December to July (MOTYB-6) and December to January (MOTYB-12) for delirium as diagnosed by a psychiatrist and to explore the diagnostic accuracies of the following other brief attention tasks: (1) spell the word "LUNCH" backwards, (2) recite the days of the week backwards, (3) 10-letter vigilance "A" task, and (4) 5 picture recognition task.

DESIGN

Preplanned secondary analysis of a prospective observational study.

SETTING

Emergency department located within an academic, tertiary care hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

234 acutely ill patients who were =65 years old.

MEASUREMENTS

The inattention tasks were administered by a physician. The reference standard for delirium was a comprehensive psychiatrist assessment using Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision criteria. Sensitivities and specificities were calculated.

RESULTS

Making any error on the MOTYB-6 task had a sensitivity of 80.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 60.9%-91.1%) and specificity of 57.1% (95% CI, 50.4%- 63.7%). Making any error on the MOTYB-12 task had a sensitivity of 84.0% (95% CI, 65.4%-93.6%) and specificity of 51.9% (95% CI, 45.2%-58.5%). The best combination of sensitivity and specificity was reciting the days of the week backwards task; if the patient made any error, this was 84.0% (95% CI, 65.4%-93.6%) sensitive and 81.9% (95% CI, 76.1%-86.5%) specific.

CONCLUSIONS

MOTYB-6 and MOTYB-12 had very good sensitivities but had modest specificities for delirium, limiting their use as a standalone assessment. Reciting the days of the week backwards appeared to have the best combination of sensitivity and specificity for delirium.

What effect does delirium have on family and nurses of older adult patients?

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to analyse the level of distress caused by delirium in patients' family and their nurses, and to identify factors associated with psychological distress in families of older adult inpatients in Intermediate Care Units/IMCUs regarding their global experience during hospitalization.

METHOD

A prospective pilot study was carried out with families and nurses of older adult patients (≥65 y.o.) consecutively recruited from two IMCUs in Intensive Care Medicine Service in a University Hospital. Patients with Glasgow Coma Scale ≤11, brain injury, blindness/deafness and inability to communicate were excluded. Delirium was daily assessed with Confusion Assessment Method/CAM. The distress level regarding this episode in family and nurses was measured with Delirium Experience Questionnaire/DEQ. Family psychological distress of all recruited patients was assessed with Kessler Psychological Distress Scale/K10.

RESULTS

This study included 42 inpatients (mean age/MA = 78 y.o., 50% women), 32 families (68.8% sons/daughters, MA = 50.6 y.o., 81.3% women) and 12 nurses caring for delirium patients (MA = 33 y.o., all women). A total of 12 (28.6%) patients had delirium. Distress related to this episode were higher for families than for nurses (M = 3 vs. M = 2), but differences did not reach statistical significance (Z = -1.535, p = 0.125). The hierarchical regression model explained 44.3% of variability in family psychological distress. Higher levels of psychological distress were associated with living with the patient (p = 0.029), presence of previous cognitive decline (p = 0.048) and development of delirium (p = 0.010).

CONCLUSION

These preliminary results show that family psychological distress is higher, when older adult patients developed delirium during hospitalization. Particular attention to these family carers should be given in future development of psychological support and psychoeducational interventions.

Performance of the French version of the 4AT for screening the elderly for delirium in the emergency department

OBJECTIVES

Delirium is very frequent in older patients presenting to the emergency department (ED), but is often undetected. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of the French version of the 4 A’s Test (4AT-F) for the detection of delirium and cognitive impairment in older patients.

METHODS

The study was conducted in four Canadian ED. Participants (n= 320) were independent or semi-independent patients (able to perform ≥5 activities of daily living) aged 65 and older and had an 8-hour exposure to the ED environment. The Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status (TICS-m), the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) as well as the 4AT-F were administered to patients at the initial interview. The CAM and 4AT-F were then administered twice a day during the patients’ ED or hospital stay. The 4AT-F’s sensitivity and specificity were compared to those of the CAM (for delirium), and to that of the TICS (for cognitive impairment).

RESULTS

Our results suggest that the 4AT-F has a sensitivity of 84% (95% CI: [76, 93]) and a specificity of 74% (95% CI: [70, 78]) for delirium, as well as a sensitivity of 49% (95% CI: [34, 64]) and a specificity of 87% (95% CI: [82, 92]) for cognitive impairment.

CONCLUSION

The 4AT-F is a fast and reliable screening tool for delirium and cognitive impairment in ED. Due to its quick administration time, it allows a systematic screening of patients at risk of delirium, without significantly increasing the workload of the ED staff.

A prospective observational study to investigate utility of the Delirium Observational Screening Scale (DOSS) to detect delirium in care home residents

Background

care home residents are particularly at risk of delirium due to high prevalence of dementia. The Delirium Observation Screening Scale (DOSS) identifies behavioural changes associated delirium onset that nursing staff are uniquely placed to recognise. We tested the psychometric properties of the DOSS in UK care homes compared with the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM).

Design

prospective observational cohort study performed between 1 March 2015 and 30 June 2016.

Setting

nine UK residential and nursing care homes.

Subjects

residents over 65 years except those approaching end of life or unable to complete delirium assessments.

Methods

the 25-item DOSS was completed daily by care home staff and compared with the temporally closest CAM performed twice per week by trained researchers. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, diagnostic odds and likelihood ratios were calculated.

Results

216 residents participated; mean age 84.9 (SD 7.9); 50% had cognitive impairment (median AMTS 7 (IQR 3-9)). Half of all expected DOSS assessments occurred (30,201); of these, 11,659 (39%) were complete. 78 positive CAM measurements were made during 71 delirium episodes in 45 residents over 70 weeks. Sensitivity and specificity for delirium detection were optimised at a DOSS cut point of ≥5 (sensitivity 0.61 (95% CI: 0.39-0.80) and specificity (0.71 95% CI: 0.70-0.73)). Positive and negative predictive values were 1.6 and 99.5%, respectively.

Conclusions

the low sensitivity of the DOSS limits clinical utility for detection of delirium as part of routine care for care home residents, although a negative DOSS affords confidence that delirium is not present.

Identification of delirium and dementia in older medical inpatients in Tanzania: A comparison of screening and diagnostic methods

BACKGROUND

In sub-Saharan Africa, there are no validated screening tools for delirium in older adults. This study assesses clinical utility of two instruments, the IDEA cognitive screen and the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) for identification of delirium in older adults admitted to medical wards of a tertiary referral hospital in Tanzania.

METHOD

The IDEA cognitive screen and CAM were administered to a consecutive cohort of older individuals on admission to Kilimanjaro Christian Medical Centre using a blinded protocol. Consensus diagnosis for delirium was established against DSM-5 criteria and dementia by DSM-IV criteria.

RESULTS

Of 507 admission assessments, 95 (18.7%) had DSM-5 delirium and 95 (18.7%) had DSM-IV dementia (33 (6.5%) delirium superimposed on dementia). The CAM and IDEA cognitive screen had very good diagnostic accuracy for delirium (AUROC curve 0.94 and 0.87 respectively). However, a number of participants (10.5% and 16.4% respectively) were unable to complete these screening assessments due to reduced consciousness, or other causes of reduced verbal response and were excluded from this analysis; many of whom met DSM-5 criteria for delirium. Secondary analysis suggests that selected cognitive and observational items from the CAM and IDEA cognitive screen may be as effective as the full screening tools in identifying delirium even in unresponsive patients.

CONCLUSION

Both instruments appeared useful for delirium screening in this inpatient setting, but had significant limitations. The combination of assessment items identified may form the basis of a brief, simple delirium screening tool suitable for use by non-specialist clinicians. Further development work is needed.

Five short screening tests in the detection of prevalent delirium: diagnostic accuracy and performance in different neurocognitive subgroups

BACKGROUND

Delirium is prevalent and serious, yet remains under-recognised. Systematic screening could improve detection; however, consensus is lacking as to the best approach. Our aim was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of five simple cognitive tests in delirium screening: six-item cognitive impairment test (6-CIT), clock-drawing test, spatial span forwards, months of the year backwards (MOTYB) and intersecting pentagons (IPT).

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted. Within 36 h of admission, older medical patients were assessed for delirium using the Revised Delirium Rating Scale. They also underwent testing using the five cognitive tests outlined above. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (PPV; NPV) were calculated for each method. Where appropriate, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was also calculated.

RESULTS

Four hundred seventy patients were included, and 184 had delirium. Of the tests scored on a scale, the 6-CIT had the highest AUC (0.876), the optimum cut-off for delirium screening being 8/9 (sensitivity 89.9%, specificity 62.7%, NPV 91.2%, PPV 59.2%). The MOTYB, scored in a binary fashion, also performed well (sensitivity 84.6%, specificity 58.4%, NPV 87.4%, PPV 52.8). On discriminant analysis, 6-CIT was the only test to discriminate between patients with delirium and those with dementia (without delirium), Wilks' Lambda = 0.748, p < 0.001.

CONCLUSION

The 6-CIT measures attention, temporal orientation and short-term memory and shows promise as a delirium screening test. This study suggests that it may also have potential in distinguishing the cognitive impairment of delirium from that of dementia in older patients. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Delirium in Older Persons: Advances in Diagnosis and Treatment

Importance

Delirium is defined as an acute disorder of attention and cognition. It is a common, serious, and often fatal condition among older patients. Although often underrecognized, delirium has serious adverse effects on the individual's function and quality of life, as well as broad societal effects with substantial health care costs.

Objective

To summarize the current state of the art in diagnosis and treatment of delirium and to highlight critical areas for future research to advance the field.

Evidence Review

Search of Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for the past 6 years, from January 1, 2011, until March 16, 2017, using a combination of controlled vocabulary and keyword terms. Since delirium is more prevalent in older adults, the focus was on studies in elderly populations; studies based solely in the intensive care unit (ICU) and non-English-language articles were excluded.

Findings

Of 127 articles included, 25 were clinical trials, 42 cohort studies, 5 systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and 55 were other categories. A total of 11 616 patients were represented in the treatment studies. Advances in diagnosis have included the development of brief screening tools with high sensitivity and specificity, such as the 3-Minute Diagnostic Assessment; 4 A's Test; and proxy-based measures such as the Family Confusion Assessment Method. Measures of severity, such as the Confusion Assessment Method-Severity Score, can aid in monitoring response to treatment, risk stratification, and assessing prognosis. Nonpharmacologic approaches focused on risk factors such as immobility, functional decline, visual or hearing impairment, dehydration, and sleep deprivation are effective for delirium prevention and also are recommended for delirium treatment. Current recommendations for pharmacologic treatment of delirium, based on recent reviews of the evidence, recommend reserving use of antipsychotics and other sedating medications for treatment of severe agitation that poses risk to patient or staff safety or threatens interruption of essential medical therapies.

Conclusions and Relevance

Advances in diagnosis can improve recognition and risk stratification of delirium. Prevention of delirium using nonpharmacologic approaches is documented to be effective, while pharmacologic prevention and treatment of delirium remains controversial.

Accuracy of oncologist assessments of psychiatric problems in cancer inpatients

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to examine the accuracy of non-psychiatrist assessments of psychiatric problems in cancer patients.

METHOD

We conducted a retrospective chart review of cancer patients who were admitted and referred to the consultation-liaison (C-L) team between January of 2011 and December of 2012. The agreement between non-psychiatrist assessments and final diagnoses by attending C-L psychiatrists was estimated for every category of referral assessment using codes from the International Classification of Mental and Behavioral Disorders (10th revision). The data were obtained from the consultation records of 240 cancer inpatients who were referred to the C-L service at a tertiary care center in Tokyo.

RESULTS

The agreement ratio between referring oncologists and psychiatrists differed according to the evaluation categories. The degrees of agreement for the categories of "delirious," "depressive," "dyssomnia," "anxious," "demented," "psychotic," and "other" were 0.87, 0.43, 0.51, 0.50, 0.27, 0.55, and 0.57, respectively. The agreement for all patients was 0.65. Significant differences were observed among seven categories (chi-squared value = 42.454 at p < 0.001 and df = 6). The analysis of means for proportions showed that the degree of agreement for the "delirious" category was significantly higher and that that for the "depressive" category was lower than that for all patients, while for the "demented" category it was close to the lower decision limit but barely significant. One half of the 20 cases who were referred as depressive were diagnosed with delirium, with one quarter of those having continuously impaired consciousness. Some 7 of the 11 cases who were referred as demented were diagnosed as having delirium.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

The accuracy of non-psychiatrist assessments for psychiatric problems in cancer patients differs by presumed diagnosis. Oncologists should consider unrecognized delirium in cancer inpatients who appear depressed or demented.

Hospitalized Older Adults With Established Delirium: Recognition, Documentation, and Reporting

Delirium, a life-threatening complication for hospitalized older adults associated with adverse outcomes, is often underrecognized and underreported. The purpose of the current study was to analyze delirium documentation for hospitalized older adults. Charts of 34 patients, aged 71 and older with documented delirium and referral to a Hospital Elder Life Program, were reviewed. With the exception of International Classification of Diseases-9 coding, delirium was only mentioned in 12 (35.3%) charts, although descriptors potentially indicative of delirium were usually recorded. Of these, the most frequently recorded were confusion (94.1%), mental status change (70.6%), and disorientation (61.8%). When nurses charted delirium descriptors, only 5.9% of their notes included physician referral. Physician responses were to order diagnostic tests and medications, usually antipsychotic or benzodiazepine agents. Of 28 patients requiring transfer to another facility after discharge, delirium was mentioned in only one transfer note. Commonly used delirium descriptors can be used for the development of natural language processing tools for clinical decision support. [Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 43(3), 32-40.].

Delirium: a guide for the general physician

Delirium describes a sudden onset change in mental status of fluctuating course. This is a state of altered consciousness characterised chiefly by inattention or lack of arousal, but can also include new impairment of language, perception and behaviour. Certain predisposing factors can make an individual more susceptible to delirium in the face of a stressor. Stressors include direct insults to the brain, insults peripheral to the brain or external changes in the environment of an individual. Delirium is varied in its presentation, and can be categorised by the psychomotor profile as: hyperactive type (overly vigilant, agitated, often wandersome), hypoactive type (sedate or withdrawn) or mixed types.

Delirium: a guide for the general physician

Delirium describes a sudden onset change in mental status of fluctuating course. This is a state of altered consciousness characterised chiefly by inattention or lack of arousal, but can also include new impairment of language, perception and behaviour. Certain predisposing factors can make an individual more susceptible to delirium in the face of a stressor. Stressors include direct insults to the brain, insults peripheral to the brain or external changes in the environment of an individual. Delirium is varied in its presentation, and can be categorised by the psychomotor profile as: hyperactive type (overly vigilant, agitated, often wandersome), hypoactive type (sedate or withdrawn) or mixed types.

Delirium: a guide for the general physician

Delirium describes a sudden onset change in mental status of fluctuating course. This is a state of altered consciousness characterised chiefly by inattention or lack of arousal, but can also include new impairment of language, perception and behaviour. Certain predisposing factors can make an individual more susceptible to delirium in the face of a stressor. Stressors include direct insults to the brain, insults peripheral to the brain or external changes in the environment of an individual. Delirium is varied in its presentation, and can be categorised by the psychomotor profile as: hyperactive type (overly vigilant, agitated, often wandersome), hypoactive type (sedate or withdrawn) or mixed types.

Attention, vigilance and visuospatial function in hospitalized elderly medical patients: Relationship to neurocognitive diagnosis

OBJECTIVE

Efficient detection of neurocognitive disorders is a key diagnostic challenge. We explored how simple bedside tests of attention, vigilance and visuospatial function might assist in identifying delirium in hospitalized patients.

METHODS

Performance on a battery of bedside cognitive tests was compared in elderly medical inpatients with DSM-IV delirium, dementia, comorbid delirium-dementia, and no neurocognitive disorder.

RESULTS

193 patients [mean age 79.9±7.3; 97 male] were assessed with delirium (n=45), dementia (n=33), comorbid delirium-dementia (n=65) and no neurocognitive disorder (NNCD) (n=50). The ability to meaningfully engage with the tests varied from 84% (Spatial Span Forwards) to 57% (Vigilance B test), and was especially problematic among the comorbid delirium-dementia group. The NNCD was distinguished from the delirium groups for most tests, and from the dementia group for the Vigilance B test and the Clock Drawing Test. The dementia group differed from delirium groups in respect of the Months Backward Test, Vigilance A and B tests, Global assessment of visuospatial ability and the Interlocking Pentagons Test. Overall, patients with delirium were best identified by three tests - the Months Backward Test, Vigilance A test and the Global Assessment of visuospatial function with failure to correctly complete any two of these predicting delirium status in 80% of cases.

CONCLUSION

Simple bedside tests of attention, vigilance and visuospatial ability can help to distinguish neurocognitive disorders, including delirium, from other presentations. There is a need to develop more accurate methods specifically designed to assess patients with neurocognitive disorder who are unable to engage with conventional tests.

The Diagnosis of Delirium Superimposed on Dementia: An Emerging Challenge

Delirium occurring in patients with dementia is referred to as delirium superimposed on dementia (DSD). People who are older with dementia and who are institutionalized are at increased risk of developing delirium when hospitalized. In addition, their prior cognitive impairment makes detecting their delirium a challenge. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition and the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 10th Revision are considered the standard reference for the diagnosis of delirium and include criteria of impairments in cognitive processes such as attention, additional cognitive disturbances, or altered level of arousal. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition and the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 10th Revision does not provide guidance regarding specific tests for assessment of the cognitive process impaired in delirium. Importantly, the assessment or inclusion of preexisting cognitive impairment is also not addressed by these standards. The challenge of DSD gets more complex as types of dementia, particularly dementia with Lewy bodies, which has features of both delirium and dementia, are considered. The objective of this article is to critically review key elements for the diagnosis of DSD, including the challenge of neuropsychological assessment in patients with dementia and the influence of particular tests used to diagnose DSD. To address the challenges of DSD diagnosis, we present a framework for guiding the focus of future research efforts to develop a reliable reference standard to diagnose DSD. A key feature of a reliable reference standard will improve the ability to clinically diagnose DSD in facility-based patients and research studies.

The utility of the clock drawing test in detection of delirium in elderly hospitalised patients

OBJECTIVES

Delirium is common neuropsychiatric condition among elderly inpatients. The clock drawing test (CDT) has been used widely as bedside screening tool in assessing cognitive impairment in elderly people. Previous studies which evaluate its usefulness in delirium reported conflicting results. The objective of this study was to evaluate the utility of CDT to detect delirium in elderly medical patients.

METHOD

Prospective, observational, longitudinal study. All acute medical admissions 70 years of age and above were approached within 72 hours of admission for recruitment. Patients eligible for inclusion were assessed four times, twice weekly during admission. Assessment included Confusion Assessment Method (CAM), Delirium Rating Scale (DRS-98R), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE) II, and CDT. Data was analysed using a linear mixed effect model.

RESULTS

Three hundred and twenty-three assessments with the CDT were performed on 200 subjects (50% male, mean age 81.13; standard deviation: 6.45). The overall rate of delirium (CAM+) during hospitalisation was 23%. There was a significant negative correlation between the CDT and DRS-R98 scores (Pearson correlation r = -0.618, p < 0.001), CDT and CAM (Spearman's rho = -0.402, p < 0.001) and CDT and total MoCA score (Pearson's r = 0.767, p < 0.001). However, when the data were analysed longitudinally controlling for all the factors, we found that cognitive function and age were significant factors associated with CDT scores (p < .0001): neither the presence nor the severity of delirium had an additional significant effect on the CDT.

CONCLUSION

CDT score reflects cognitive impairment, independently of the presence or severity of delirium. The CDT is not a suitable test for delirium in hospitalised elderly patients.

Assessment of inattention in the context of delirium screening: one size does not fit all!

BACKGROUND

Despite its high prevalence and deleterious consequences, delirium often goes undetected in older hospitalized patients and long-term care (LTC) residents. Inattention is a core symptom of this syndrome. The aim of this study was to explore the usefulness of ten simple and objective attention tests that would enable efficient delirium screening among this population.

METHODS

This was a secondary analysis (n = 191) of a validation study conducted in one acute care hospital (ACH) and one LTC facility among older adults with, or without, cognitive impairment. The attention test tasks (n = 10) were drawn from the Concentration subscale the Hierarchic Dementia Scale (HDS). Delirium was defined as meeting the criteria for DSM-5 delirium. The Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) was used to determine the presence of delirium symptoms.

RESULTS

The Months of the Year Backward (MOTYB) test, which 57% of participants completed successfully, showed the best balance between sensitivity and specificity (82.6%; 95% CI [61.2-95.0], and 62.5%; 95% CI [54.7-69.8] respectively) for the entire group. Subgroup analyses revealed that no test had both sensitivity and specificity over 50% in participants with cognitive impairment indicated in their medical chart.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results revealed that these tests varied greatly in performance and none can be earmarked to become a single-item screening tool for delirium among older patients and residents with, or without, cognitive impairment. The presence of premorbid cognitive impairment may necessitate more extensive assessments of delirium, especially when a change in general status or mental state is observed.

Diagnostic test accuracy of informant-based tools to diagnose dementia in older hospital patients with delirium: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

delirium and dementia co-exist commonly in hospital. Older people with delirium have high rates of undiagnosed dementia, but delirium affects the use of cognitive testing in dementia diagnosis. Novel methods to detect dementia in delirium are needed. The purpose of the study was to investigate the diagnostic test accuracy of informant tools to detect dementia in hospitalised older people with delirium.

METHODS

the presence of dementia on admission was assessed using the short form of the Informant Questionnaire of Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE-SF) and Alzheimer's Disease 8 (AD8) in people over 70 years old with delirium. Reference standard diagnosis was made using Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders fourth edition (DSM-IV) criteria at 3 months. The main outcome measures were the diagnostic test accuracy of the IQCODE-SF and the AD8 in diagnosing DSM-IV dementia.

RESULTS

dementia prevalence at 3 months was 61%. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was 0.93 (P < 0.0005) for admission IQCODE-SF and 0.91 (P < 0.0005) for admission AD8. An IQCODE-SF test result of >3.82 on admission had a sensitivity of 0.91 (0.79-0.97) and specificity of 0.93 (0.76-0.99) for detecting dementia. An AD8 of >6 had a sensitivity of 0.83 (0.69-0.92) and specificity of 0.90 (0.72-0.97) for detecting dementia.

CONCLUSION

the IQCODE-SF and AD8 are sensitive and specific tools to detect prior dementia in older people with delirium. The routine use of either tool in practice could have important clinical impact, by improving the recognition and hence management of those with dementia.