2008
DOI: 10.1177/0269216308099210
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Validation of the confusion assessment method in the palliative care setting

Abstract: The Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) is widely used in the palliative care setting despite the fact that its performance in this population has not been validated. The aim of the study was to determine the sensitivity and specificity of the CAM when used by Non-Consultant Hospital Doctors (NCHDs) working in a specialist palliative care unit. A pilot phase was performed in which NCHDs received a 1-hour training session based on the original CAM training manual. 32 patients underwent 33 assessments in the pilot… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
93
0
2

Year Published

2010
2010
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 104 publications
(96 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
1
93
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…62,64 Clinicians were involved in patient screening and assessment in half the studies, highlighting potential for routine delirium screening outside a research context, and feasibility of increasing delirium recognition capabilities by nonpsychiatric clinicians through training and access to validated delirium-screening and assessment tools. 38,50,54 Delirium screening by nurses in a hospice setting has been demonstrated to be feasible and effective. 14,25 However, the challenges of screening for delirium in palliative care populations was also demonstrated by the small proportion of included studies measuring delirium occurrence specifically in cohorts of patients who were dying, and proportion of patients and/or families who declined to participate in the delirium assessment process, indicating delirium assessment is not always acceptable to them.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…62,64 Clinicians were involved in patient screening and assessment in half the studies, highlighting potential for routine delirium screening outside a research context, and feasibility of increasing delirium recognition capabilities by nonpsychiatric clinicians through training and access to validated delirium-screening and assessment tools. 38,50,54 Delirium screening by nurses in a hospice setting has been demonstrated to be feasible and effective. 14,25 However, the challenges of screening for delirium in palliative care populations was also demonstrated by the small proportion of included studies measuring delirium occurrence specifically in cohorts of patients who were dying, and proportion of patients and/or families who declined to participate in the delirium assessment process, indicating delirium assessment is not always acceptable to them.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…4,38,41 The CAM 49 was validated in other clinical settings and languages, 43 and subsequently validated in the palliative care setting. 54 No studies reported perspectives of patients or families of the acceptability of delirium-screening and assessment processes.…”
Section: Screening and Assessment Toolsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Similarly, Lemiengre et al 38 reported a low sensitivity when nurses in geriatric care used the CAM without concomitant cognitive testing, with difficulties identified in recognizing acute onset, fluctuation, and altered level of consciousness. In a palliative care setting, Ryan et al 41 reported that these problems were not limited to nurses; physicians also had problems recognizing these characteristics on the basis of CAM results. Because of the findings of low precision when CAM is used alone, combining the CAM with cognition testing might be a desirable practice to improve the detection of delirium, especially when CAM assessments are performed by caregivers who are not specialists in geriatric psychiatry.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…33,34 Te Confusion Assessment Method is a brief screening tool for delirium that has been validated in many patient populations, including patients with advanced illnesses. 35 More detailed diagnostic tools, such as the Delirium Rating Scale Revised-98 and the Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale, can be used to confrm the diagnosis of delirium and monitor changes over time. 36 It is important to be attentive to the various delirium subtypes (hypoactive, hyperactive or mixed) and identify any reversible causes, such as dehydration, electrolyte abnormalities, infection, pain, and medications (ie, opioids, benzodiazepines, anticholinergics, steroids).…”
Section: Assessmentmentioning
confidence: 99%