Validation of the Delirium Diagnostic Tool-Provisional (DDT-Pro) With Medical Inpatients and Comparison With the Confusion Assessment Method Algorithm

Practical Application of a Battery of Brief Tools to Evaluate Geriatric Medical Inpatients for the Three Ds

OBJECTIVE

The investigators aimed to identify the clinical characteristics of patients with or without delirium and preexisting depression, dementia, both, or neither by using validated tools easily administered in clinical practice.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional prospective observational study conducted in Medellín, Colombia, 200 geriatric inpatients were evaluated with the Delirium Diagnostic Tool-Provisional (DDT-Pro), Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly, Hachinski Ischemic Scale, Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia, and Charlson Comorbidity Index-short form. Delirium motor subtype, mortality, and length of hospital stay were assessed.

RESULTS

The study included 134 patients without delirium (67%), 14 with delirium only (7%), 16 with delirium and dementia (8%), 13 with delirium and depression (7%), and 23 with delirium, dementia, and depression (the three Ds) (12%). Prevalence rates of dementia (59%) and depression (55%) among 66 patients with delirium were higher than prevalence rates among patients without delirium (13% and 28%, respectively), suggesting that both conditions are risk factors. Main medical diagnoses, mortality, and dementia type did not differ among groups. Motor subtypes were similar among delirium groups. Patients in the delirium groups, except those in the delirium and depression group, were older than patients without delirium. Medical burden was highest among the patients with delirium and dementia and those with all three conditions. Delirium and dementia were more severe when comorbid with each other. Depression was most severe among patients with delirium and depression. Patients with all three conditions had a longer length of hospital stay than those without delirium.

CONCLUSIONS

Using brief tools to detect dementia and depression in conjunction with the DDT-Pro to assess delirium diagnosis and severity is feasible and enables a more in-depth evaluation of elderly hospitalized patients. Because previous longitudinal research suggests that these comorbid conditions influence prognosis following a delirium episode, better identification of the three Ds offers proactive interventional opportunities. Depression is an underrecognized risk factor for delirium.

An Interdisciplinary Reappraisal of Delirium and Proposed Subtypes

An interdisciplinary plenary session entitled "Rethinking and Rehashing Delirium" was held during the 2021 Annual Meeting of the Academy of Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry to facilitate dialog on the prevalent approach to delirium. Panel members included a psychiatrist, neurointensivist, and critical care specialist, and attendee comments were solicited with the goal of developing a statement. Discussion was focused on a reappraisal of delirium and, in particular, its disparate terminology and history in relation to acute encephalopathy. The authors endorse a recent joint position statement that describes acute encephalopathy as a rapidly evolving (<4 weeks) pathobiological brain process that presents as subsyndromal delirium, delirium, or coma and suggest the following points of refinement: (1) to suggest that "delirium disorder" describe the diagnostic construct including its syndrome, precipitant(s), and unique pathophysiology; (2) to restrict the term "delirium" to describing the clinical syndrome encountered at the bedside; (3) to clarify that the disfavored term "altered mental status" may occasionally be an appropriate preliminary designation where the diagnosis cannot yet be specified further; and (4) to provide rationale for rejecting the terms acute brain injury, failure, or dysfunction. The final common pathway of delirium appears to involve higher-level brain network dysfunction, but there are many insults that can disrupt functional connectivity. We propose that future delirium classification systems should seek to characterize the unique pathophysiological disturbances ("endotypes") that underlie delirium and delirium's individual neuropsychiatric symptoms. We provide provisional means of classification in hopes that novel subtypes might lead to specific intervention to improve patient experience and outcomes. This paper concludes by considering future directions for the field. Key areas of opportunity include interdisciplinary initiatives to harmonize efforts across specialties and settings, enhance underrepresented groups in research, integration of delirium and encephalopathy in coding, development of relevant quality and safety measures, and exploration of opportunities for translational science.

Delusions and Hallucinations Are Associated With Greater Severity of Delirium

BACKGROUND

The 3 core domains of delirium (cognitive, higher level thinking, circadian) do not include the less common noncore psychotic symptoms. However, psychosis might inform about perturbations of neural circuitry, outcomes, or suggest tailored clinical management.

OBJECTIVE

We assessed for the first time the relationships between psychosis and other characteristics of delirium in patients without confounders for delirium phenotype, such as dementia or antipsychotics treatment.

METHODS

Cross-sectional analysis of 366 adults with delirium per the Delirium Rating Scale Revised-98, whose items distinguish hallucinations and delusions from other types of misperceptions and abnormal thought content, assessed during the preceding 24 hours to capture symptom severity fluctuation. The relationship of psychosis with other delirium characteristics was assessed using bivariate comparisons and analysis of variance as appropriate for groups with no psychosis and any psychosis (hallucinations and/or delusions), and subgroups with only hallucinations, only delusions, or both. A discriminant logistic model assessed variables associated with presence of any psychotic features versus none.

RESULTS

Delirium with any psychotic features occurred in 44.5% (163 of 366). Of the 366, 119 (32.5%) had only hallucinations (Hall), 14 (3.8%) had only delusions (Del), and 30 (8.2%) had both (Both). In the psychotic group (n = 163), 73.0% were Hall, 8.6% Del, and 18.4% Both. All psychotic patient groupings had significantly greater delirium severity on the Delirium Rating Scale Revised-98. Delusions and hallucinations were discordant for occurring together. The discriminant model found increased odds of having psychosis as 3 symptom severities increased (visuospatial ability, thought process, and sleep-wake cycle) where these each represented a delirium core domain. The noncore symptom of lability of affect had high odds ratio for psychosis, while motor retardation reduced odds of psychosis in this model.

CONCLUSIONS

Consistent with prior reports, psychosis occurred in less than half of delirious patients with delusions being infrequent, and an association with affective lability was found. We are the first to report that psychotic features are a marker for more severe delirium affecting all core domains. Given that previous functional magnetic resonance imaging research found a correlation between neural network dysconnectivity with greater severity of delirium, psychotic symptoms might be a clinical marker for greater underlying cerebral cortical neural circuitry dysfunction.

Variables associated with concordance or discordance for delirium diagnosis between referring and consulting physicians at a Tertiary Hospital in Colombia: Prospective observational study

Delirium is an acute state of impaired consciousness and a medical urgency. Its broad range of alterations in mental status make diagnosis challenging. Awareness and accurate provisional diagnosis by nonpsychiatric clinicians are important for prompt management. Because delirium symptoms overlap and mimic other neuropsychiatric conditions, a referral to a consultant psychiatrist is often needed. The aim of this study was to determine the discriminating variables that are associated with concordance or discordance for a DSM-5 delirium diagnosis made by the consultation/liaison (C/L) psychiatrist as compared to the referral diagnosis/reasons given by the referring physicians for inpatients from a Tertiary Hospital in a Latin-American country. Prospective study of a cohort of 399 consecutive patients admitted to any ward of a university hospital in Medellin-Colombia and referred by a specialist physician to the C/L Psychiatry service. Analyses for diagnostic concordance used a nested sample of 140 cases diagnosed with delirium by the psychiatrist. Two multivariate logistic models were run, for delirium diagnosis concordance and discordance between the referring physician and C/L psychiatrist. The referral diagnosis was concordant with that of Psychiatry in 90/140 patients in 64.3%, with 35.7% discordance. Increasing age (OR = 1.024) and internal medicine ward (OR = 3.0) were significantly related (Wald statistic P < .05) to concordance in the multivariate analysis whose model accuracy was 68.6%. Trauma/orthopedics ward (OR = 5.7) and SARS-CoV-2 infection (OR = 3.8) were important contributors to the model fit though not significant. Accuracy of the discordance model was 70.7%, where central nervous system (CNS) disorder (OR = 6.1) and referrals from ICU (OR = 4.9), surgery (OR = 4.6), neurology/neurosurgery (OR = 5.1) and another consultant (OR = 4.7) were significantly related (Wald statistic P < .05), while metabolic/endocrine disorder (OR = 2.7) was important for model fit, but not significant. Concordance for delirium diagnosis was higher from services where education, guidelines and working relationships with C/L Psychiatry could have contributed beneficially whereas, surprisingly, CNS disorders and neurology/neurosurgery services had higher discordance, as well as the ICU. Routine use of brief sensitive delirium assessment tools such as the DDT-Pro could enhance provisional delirium diagnosis.

Validation of the Korean Version of the Delirium Diagnostic Tool-Provisional (K-DDT-Pro)

OBJECTIVE

The Delirium Diagnostic Tool-Provisional (DDT-Pro) was designed to detect the presence and severity of delirium briefly and objectively regardless of psychiatric expertise. We translated the DDT-Pro into Korean and validated it in elderly Korean patients.

METHODS

To validate the translation and evaluate inter-rater reliability, a psychiatric trainee and a research nurse independently assessed the same patients referred to the Department of Psychiatry. The results were compared with the reference evaluations performed by a psychiatrist using the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition (DSM-5).

RESULTS

We enrolled 42 elderly patients. The Cronbach's alpha coefficient were 0.839 (the trainee), 0.822 (the nurse). The Cohen's weighted κ between the trainee and nurse, ranged from 0.555±0.102 to 0.776±0.062. The Pearson correlation coefficients (Korean version of the DDT-Pro [K-DDT-Pro] and Korean version of the Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98 [DRS-R98-K] total score) were γ=-0.850 (the trainee), and γ=-0.821 (the nurse). The areas under the ROC curves (AUCs) were 0.974 (the trainee) and 0.893 (the nurse).

CONCLUSION

The K-DDT-Pro exhibited high internal consistency and relatively substantial inter-rater reliability. The correlation with the DRS-R98-K was strongly negative. The accuracy of the K-DDT-Pro was excellent, regardless of expertise. In conclusion, the K-DDT-Pro is a brief and simple tool that usefully screens for delirium in elderly patients.

Delirium in Nursing Home Residents: A Narrative Review

Delirium is an important component of the geriatric syndromes and has been recognized to negatively influence the prognosis of older people in hospital and in a post-acute setting. About 2–5% of older people world-wide live in nursing homes and are characterized by functional impairment, cognitive decline, dementia, comorbidities, and polypharmacotherapy, all factors which influence the development of delirium. However, in this setting, delirium remains often understudied. Therefore, in this narrative review, we aimed to describe the latest evidence regarding delirium screening tools, epidemiology characteristics, outcomes, risk factors, and preventions strategies in nursing homes.

Consensus of the Liaison-Psychiatry Committee of the Colombian Psychiatric Association on the diagnosis and treatment of delirium in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic

The pandemic caused by the new coronavirus named SARS-CoV-2 poses unprecedented challenges in the health care. Among them is the increase in cases of delirium. The severe SARS-CoV-2 disease, COVID-19, has common vulnerabilities with delirium and produces alterations in organs such as the lungs or the brain, among others, which have the potential to trigger the mental disorder. In fact, delirium may be the first manifestation of the infection, before fever, general malaise, cough or respiratory disturbances. It is widely supported that delirium increases the morbidity and mortality in those who suffer from it during hospitalization, so it should be actively sought to carry out the relevant interventions. In the absence of evidence on the approach to delirium in the context of COVID-19, this consensus was developed on three fundamental aspects: diagnosis, non-pharmacological treatment and pharmacological treatment, in patients admitted to the general hospital. The document contains recommendations on the systematic use of diagnostic tools, when to hospitalize the patient with delirium, the application of non-pharmacological actions within the restrictions imposed by COVID-19, and the use of antipsychotics, taking into account the most relevant side effects and pharmacological interactions.

Etiologies of Delirium in Consecutive COVID-19 Inpatients and the Relationship Between Severity of Delirium and COVID-19 in a Prospective Study With Follow-Up

OBJECTIVE

The investigators aimed to describe delirium etiologies and clinical characteristics, as well as the relationship between COVID-19 and delirium severities, at baseline and follow-up after delirium improvement among patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection.

METHODS

A longitudinal study of 20 consecutive critically ill, delirious COVID-19 inpatients, assessed with the Charlson Comorbidity Index-Short Form (CCI-SF), COVID-19 Clinical Severity Scale (CCSS), Delirium Etiology Checklist, Delirium Motor Subtype Scale-4, and Delirium Diagnostic Tool-Provisional (DDT-Pro), was conducted. Correlational analysis of delirium severity (DDT-Pro) with each measure of clinical severity (CCI-SF and CCSS) and comparison of baseline DDT-Pro scores between patients who were living and those who were deceased at follow-up were conducted.

RESULTS

Participants were 50-90 years old (male, 75%; hypertension, 60%). The prevalence of preexisting medical comorbidities (CCI-SF) was low and not correlated with delirium severity (p=0.193). Eighteen patients were on mechanical or high-flow noninvasive ventilation at baseline in the intensive care unit (ICU; CCSS scores 2-4). Delirium severity (DDT-Pro scores 0-6) correlated with COVID-19 severity (0.459, p=0.021). Delirium motor subtype was hyperactive in 75% of patients. There were three to four etiologies for delirium in each patient, most commonly organ insufficiency (100%), systemic infection (100%), and metabolic and endocrine disturbances (95%). The baseline DDT-Pro score was ≤4 for five (25%) patients who died before the final assessment, with a trend of being lower than that for survivors (χ²=3.398, p=0.065).

CONCLUSIONS

Among inpatients with COVID-19, at least three different etiological categories were identified for delirium. ICU staff treating patients with severe cases of COVID-19 should anticipate a greater severity of delirium. Although multivariate analyses with larger study samples are needed, more severe delirium may herald greater risk of death among COVID-19 patients.

Validation of the Delirium Diagnostic Tool-Provisional (DDT-Pro) in a skilled nursing facility and comparison to the 4 'A's test (4AT)

OBJECTIVE

To validate the Delirium Diagnostic Tool (DDT-Pro) in a SNF and compare its performance to the 4 A's Test (4AT) in real life conditions.

METHODS

Prospective cross-sectional study of 262 consecutively admitted adults to a SNF, independently assessed by psychiatrists using DSM-5 delirium criteria and by geriatricians using the DDT-Pro (0-9 points) and 4AT (0-12 points).

RESULTS

141 (53.8%) participants had dementia and 79 (30.1%) had delirium. DDT-Pro and 4AT were moderately correlated (-0.59). Accuracies against DSM-5 diagnosis ranged from 80 to 85% and were comparable between tools regardless of dementia. Recommended delirium cutoff for the DDT-Pro (≤6) had 77.2% sensitivity, 84% specificity, and NPV = 89.5% and 4AT (≥4) had 54.4% sensitivity and 92.9% specificity, with lower specificity in the dementia subsample. DDT-Pro sensitivity increased (84.8%) at ≤7cutoff. Sensitivity and specificity of all DDT-Pro and 2/4 4AT items displayed gradients along severity levels, but two dichotomously rated 4AT items had low positivity. The tools had low concordance (p < 0.05) for delirium positivity.

CONCLUSIONS

DDT-Pro is valid to detect delirium in SNF population where simple, structured tools with high sensitivity are needed. DDT-Pro items assess the three core domains of delirium as a continuous measure and may have advantages over the 4AT.

Consensus of the Liaison-Psychiatry Committee of the Colombian Psychiatric Association on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Delirium in the Context of the COVID-19 Pandemic

The pandemic caused by the new coronavirus named SARS-CoV-2 poses unprecedented challenges in the health care. Among them is the increase in cases of delirium. The severe SARS-CoV-2 disease, COVID-19, has common vulnerabilities with delirium and produces alterations in organs such as the lungs or the brain, among others, which have the potential to trigger the mental disorder. In fact, delirium may be the first manifestation of the infection, before fever, general malaise, cough or respiratory disturbances. It is widely supported that delirium increases the morbidity and mortality in those who suffer from it during hospitalization, so it should be actively sought to carry out the relevant interventions. In the absence of evidence on the approach to delirium in the context of COVID-19, this consensus was developed on three fundamental aspects: diagnosis, non-pharmacological treatment and pharmacological treatment, in patients admitted to the general hospital. The document contains recommendations on the systematic use of diagnostic tools, when to hospitalize the patient with delirium, the application of non-pharmacological actions within the restrictions imposed by COVID-19, and the use of antipsychotics, taking into account the most relevant side effects and pharmacological interactions.

Delirium diagnostic tool-provisional (DDT-Pro) scores in delirium, subsyndromal delirium and no delirium

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether the Delirium Diagnostic Tool-Provisional (DDT-Pro), a 0-9 point scale with three items each representing symptoms from delirium's three core domains, differentiates subsyndromal delirium (SSD) from delirium and no delirium.

METHODS

We applied cluster analyses of DDT-Pro scores from 200 consecutive inpatients using three reference standards for delirium diagnosis to determine DDT-Pro cutoff values for delirium, SSD and no delirium groups. Clinical validators and DDT-Pro item scores were compared among groups.

RESULTS

DDT-Pro SSD range was 6-7 (n = 54), with no delirium having higher scores (n = 98) and delirium lower (n = 48). Dementia prevalence in the SSD group (40.7%) was intermediate between no delirium (20.4%) and delirium (66.7%). SSD and delirium groups were more affected than no delirium regarding medical comorbidities, hospital stay (no delirium <1 week, SSD and delirium >1 week) and mortality (SSD = 7.4%, delirium = 18.8%, no delirium = 1%). Values for motor subtypes, frontal lobe signs, and DRS-R98 in the SSD group were intermediate between no delirium and delirium, as well as for the DDT-Pro items (all p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

All DDT-Pro items, which represent the three delirium core domains, are important for SSD diagnosis. Patients scoring in the SSD 6-7 range have significant clinical and prognostic features and deserve clinical attention.

Delirium in hospitalized older adults

Delirium is a common and underdiagnosed problem in hospitalized older adults. It is associated with an increased risk of poor cognitive and functional outcomes, institutionalization, and death. Timely diagnosis of delirium and non-pharmacological prevention and management strategies can improve patient outcomes. The Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) is the most widely used clinical assessment tool for the diagnosis of delirium. Multiple variations of the CAM have been developed for ease of administration and for the unique needs of specific patient populations, including the 3-min diagnostic CAM (3D CAM), CAM-Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU), Delirium Triage Screen (DTS)/Brief CAM (b-CAM), 4AT tool, and ultrabrief delirium assessment. Strong evidence supports the effectiveness of nonpharmacologic strategies as the primary intervention for the prevention of delirium. Multicomponent delirium prevention strategies can reduce the incidence of delirium by 40%. Investigation of underlying medical precipitants and optimization of non-pharmacological interventions are first line in the management of delirium. Despite a lack of evidence supporting use of antipsychotics, low dose antipsychotics remain second line for off-label treatment of distressing psychoses and/or agitated behaviors that are refractory to non-pharmacological behavioral interventions and pose an imminent risk of harm to self or others. Any antipsychotic prescription for delirium should be accompanied by an appropriate taper plan. Follow up with primary care providers on discharge from hospital for ongoing screening of cognitive impairment is important.