Is delirium being detected in emergency?

Traynor, Victoria; Cordato, Nicholas J.; Burns, Pippa; Xu, Yun; Britten, Nicole; Duncan, Kim; DeVries, Loren; McKinnon, Colleen

doi:10.1111/ajag.12255

Cited by 13 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Cognitive assessment in the elderly is often overlooked during acute medical admissions as healthcare professionals have a tendency to focus on physical rather than mental health [10,30,31]. With the rising proportion of the aged population in Malaysia, the number of dementia and cognitive impairment cases is expected to increase [32].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of Delirium Using the Confusion Assessment Method in Older Adult Inpatients in Malaysia

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The detection of delirium in acutely ill older patients is challenging with the lack of informants and the necessity to identify subtle and fluctuating signs. We conducted a cross-sectional study among older patients admitted to a university hospital in Malaysia to determine the presence, characteristics, and mortality outcomes of delirium. Consecutive patients aged ≥65years admitted to acute medical wards were recruited from August to September 2016. Cognitive screening was performed using the mini-mental test examination (MMSE) and the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM). The CAM-Severity (CAM-S) score was also performed in all patients. Of 161 patients recruited, 43 (26.7%) had delirium. At least one feature of delirium from the CAM-S short and long severity scores were present in 48.4% and 67.1%, respectively. Older age (OR: 1.07, 95% CI: 1.01–1.14), immobility (OR: 3.16, 95% CI: 1.18–8.50), cognitive impairment (OR: 5.04, 95% CI: 2.07–12.24), and malnutrition (OR: 3.37; 95% CI: 1.15–9.85) were significantly associated with delirium. Older patients with delirium had a higher risk of mortality (OR: 7.87, 95% CI: 2.42–25.57). Delirium is common among older patients in our setting. A large proportion of patients had altered mental status on admission to hospital although they did not fulfill the CAM criteria of delirium. This should prompt further studies on strategies to identify delirium and the use of newer, more appropriate assessment tools in this group of vulnerable individuals.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of Delirium Using the Confusion Assessment Method in Older Adult Inpatients in Malaysia

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…At least two-thirds of cases are missed in the ED and general medical settings. 7,31,32,145 There are several general reasons underlying this, including inadequate education and training, lack of a culture that facilitates delirium detection, and time constraints. However, another key reason may be the lack of a very rapid, simple, validated assessment tool that can be used without specific training.…”

Section: Chapter 5 Diagnostic Accuracy Of the 4atmentioning

confidence: 99%

The 4 ‘A’s test for detecting delirium in acute medical patients: a diagnostic accuracy study

MacLullich

Shenkin

Goodacre

et al. 2019

Health Technol Assess

105

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Delirium is a common and serious neuropsychiatric syndrome, usually triggered by illness or drugs. It remains underdetected. One reason for this is a lack of brief, pragmatic assessment tools. The 4 ‘A’s test (Arousal, Attention, Abbreviated Mental Test – 4, Acute change) (4AT) is a screening tool designed for routine use. This project evaluated its usability, diagnostic accuracy and cost. Methods Phase 1 – the usability of the 4AT in routine practice was measured with two surveys and two qualitative studies of health-care professionals, and a review of current clinical use of the 4AT as well as its presence in guidelines and reports. Phase 2 – the 4AT’s diagnostic accuracy was assessed in newly admitted acute medical patients aged ≥ 70 years. Its performance was compared with that of the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM; a longer screening tool). The performance of individual 4AT test items was related to cognitive status, length of stay, new institutionalisation, mortality at 12 weeks and outcomes. The method used was a prospective, double-blind diagnostic test accuracy study in emergency departments or in acute general medical wards in three UK sites. Each patient underwent a reference standard delirium assessment and was also randomised to receive an assessment with either the 4AT (n = 421) or the CAM (n = 420). A health economics analysis was also conducted. Results Phase 1 found evidence that delirium awareness is increasing, but also that there is a need for education on delirium in general and on the 4AT in particular. Most users reported that the 4AT was useful, and it was in widespread use both in the UK and beyond. No changes to the 4AT were considered necessary. Phase 2 involved 785 individuals who had data for analysis; their mean age was 81.4 (standard deviation 6.4) years, 45% were male, 99% were white and 9% had a known dementia diagnosis. The 4AT (n = 392) had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.90. A positive 4AT score (> 3) had a specificity of 95% [95% confidence interval (CI) 92% to 97%] and a sensitivity of 76% (95% CI 61% to 87%) for reference standard delirium. The CAM (n = 382) had a specificity of 100% (95% CI 98% to 100%) and a sensitivity of 40% (95% CI 26% to 57%) in the subset of participants whom it was possible to assess using this. Patients with positive 4AT scores had longer lengths of stay (median 5 days, interquartile range 2.0–14.0 days) than did those with negative 4AT scores (median 2 days, interquartile range 1.0–6.0 days), and they had a higher 12-week mortality rate (16.1% and 9.2%, respectively). The estimated 12-week costs of an initial inpatient stay for patients with delirium were more than double the costs of an inpatient stay for patients without delirium (e.g. in Scotland, £7559, 95% CI £7362 to £7755, vs. £4215, 95% CI £4175 to £4254). The estimated cost of false-positive cases was £4653, of false-negative cases was £8956, and of a missed diagnosis was £2067. Limitations Patients were aged ≥ 70 years and were assessed soon after they were admitted, limiting generalisability. The treatment of patients in accordance with reference standard diagnosis limited the ability to assess comparative cost-effectiveness. Conclusions These findings support the use of the 4AT as a rapid delirium assessment instrument. The 4AT has acceptable diagnostic accuracy for acute older patients aged > 70 years. Future work Further research should address the real-world implementation of delirium assessment. The 4AT should be tested in other populations. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN53388093. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 40. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. The funder specified that any new delirium assessment tool should be compared against the CAM, but had no other role in the study design or conduct of the study.

show abstract

“…This can lead to older people requiring admission to nursing homes, as well as premature death [ 12 – 15 ]. Despite these known concerns, delirium is often under-recognised and under-diagnosed [ 9 , 16 – 18 ]. Prevention of delirium along with effective management when it occurs, improves health outcomes [ 19 , 20 ] as well as cost effectiveness [ 21 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An assistant workforce to improve screening rates and quality of care for older patients in the emergency department: findings of a pre- post, mixed methods study

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundOlder people who present to the Emergency Department (ED) experience high rates of prevalent and incident delirium. This study aimed to determine whether an assistant workforce in the ED could effectively conduct screening to inform assessment and care planning for older people as well as enhance supportive care activities for prevention of delirium.MethodsUsing a pre-post design, data was collected before and after the introduction of Older Person Technical Assistants (OPTAs) in the ED. OPTA activity was recorded during the intervention period and a medical record audit undertaken prior to and 9 months after implementation.Data were analysed using descriptive statistics for OPTA activities. Weighted Kappa scores were calculated comparing concordance in screening scores between OPTAs and Aged Services Emergency Team Registered Nurses. Changes in the rates of documented screening and supportive care were analysed using Chi-square tests.Focus groups were conducted to explore clinicians’ experiences of the OPTA role.ResultsThree thousand five hundred fourty two people were seen by OPTAs in 4563 ED Presentations between 1st July 2011 and 2012. The reproducibility of all screening tools were found to be high between the OPTAs and the RNs, with Kappas and ICCs generally all above 0.9.The medical record audit showed significant improvement in the rates of documented screening, including cognition from 1.5 to 38% (p < 0.001) and review of pain from 29 to 75% (p < 0.001). Supportive care such as being given fluids or food also improved from 13 to 49% (p < 0.001) and pressure care from 4.8 to 30% (p < 0.001). This was accomplished with no increase in ED length of stay among this age group.Focus group interviews described mixed responses and support for the OPTA role.ConclusionsAn assistant workforce in an ED setting was found to provide comparable screening results and improve the rates of documented screening and supportive care provided to older people with or at risk of developing delirium in the ED. There is a need for a shared philosophy to the care of older people in the ED.Trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registration number is ACTRN12617000742370. It was retrospectively registered on 22nd May 2017.

show abstract

Is delirium being detected in emergency?

Cited by 13 publications

References 14 publications

Assessment of Delirium Using the Confusion Assessment Method in Older Adult Inpatients in Malaysia

Assessment of Delirium Using the Confusion Assessment Method in Older Adult Inpatients in Malaysia

The 4 ‘A’s test for detecting delirium in acute medical patients: a diagnostic accuracy study

An assistant workforce to improve screening rates and quality of care for older patients in the emergency department: findings of a pre- post, mixed methods study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About