The Better Assessment of Illness Study for Delirium Severity: Study Design, Procedures, and Cohort Description

One-year Medicare costs associated with delirium in older hospitalized patients with and without Alzheimer's disease dementia and related disorders

INTRODUCTION

One-year health-care costs associated with delirium in older hospitalized patients with and without Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) have not been examined previously.

METHODS

Medicare costs were determined prospectively at discharge, and at 30, 90, and 365 days in a cohort (n = 311) of older adults after hospital admission.

RESULTS

Seventy-six (24%) patients had ADRD and were more likely to develop delirium (51% vs. 24%, P < 0.001) and die within 1 year (38% vs. 21%, P = 0.002). In ADRD patients with versus without delirium, adjusted mean difference in costs associated with delirium were $34,828; most of the excess costs were incurred between 90 and 365 days (P = 0.03). In non-ADRD patients, delirium was associated with increased costs at all timepoints. Excess costs associated with delirium in ADRD patients increased progressively over 1 year, whereas in non-ADRD patients the increase was consistent across time periods.

DISCUSSION

Our findings highlight the complexity of health-care costs for ADRD patients who develop delirium, a potentially preventable source of expenditures.

HIGHLIGHTS

Novel examination of health-care costs of delirium in persons with and without Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD). Increased 1-year costs of $34,828 in ADRD patients with delirium (vs. without). Increased costs for delirium in ADRD occur later during the 365-day study period. For ADRD patients, cost differences between those with and without delirium increased over 1 year. For non-ADRD patients, the parallel cost differences were consistent over time.

Psychometric Properties of a Delirium Severity Score for Older Adults and Association With Hospital and Posthospital Outcomes

IMPORTANCE

The ability to rate delirium severity is key to providing optimal care for older adults, and such ratings would allow clinicians to target patients with severe delirium and monitor response to treatment, recovery time, and prognosis; assess nursing burden and staffing needs; and, ultimately, provide more appropriate patient-centered care. Current delirium severity measures have been limited in their content, gradations, and measurement characteristics.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the internal consistency, reliability, and validity for clinical outcomes of the DEL-S delirium severity score, a measure of delirium severity that was developed using advanced psychometric approaches, analogous to those of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System initiative.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This prospective cohort study was conducted at a large academic medical center in Boston, Massachusetts. Adults aged 70 years or older who were admitted or transferred to medical or surgical services as either emergency or elective admissions were enrolled between October 20, 2015, and March 15, 2017, and were monitored for 1 year. Data analysis was performed from June 2020 to August 2021.

EXPOSURES

Delirium severity, measured by scores on the delirium severity score short-form (SF; 6 items, scored 0-13, with higher scores indicating more severe delirium) and long-form (LF; 17 items, scored 0-21), considered continuously and grouped into 5 categories.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcomes were in-hospital outcomes, including length of stay and hospital costs, and posthospital (30, 90, and 365 days) outcomes, including death, health care costs, and rehospitalization.

RESULTS

The 352 participants had a median (IQR) age of 79.7 (74.6-85.5) years, 204 (58.0%) were women, and they were highly educated (median [IQR] duration of education, 14 [7-20] years). Patients in the highest delirium severity score SF group (scores 6-9) had a longer length of stay (13.3 vs 6.9 days; P for trend < .001), greater in-hospital costs ($57 700 vs $34 200), greater cumulative health care costs ($168 700 vs $106 500; P for trend = .01), and increased mortality at 1 year (50% vs 17%; P for trend = .02) compared with patients in the lowest delirium severity score SF group (score 0). Similar trends and significant findings were demonstrated for the delirium severity score LF.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

These findings suggest that the delirium severity score provides an approach for measuring delirium severity that is associated with adverse clinical outcomes in a direct exposure-response association and that the delirium severity score may help advance patient-centered care for delirium.

Comparative Implementation of a Brief App-Directed Protocol for Delirium Identification by Hospitalists, Nurses, and Nursing Assistants : A Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Systematic screening improves delirium identification among hospitalized older adults. Little data exist on how to implement such screening.

OBJECTIVE

To test implementation of a brief app-directed protocol for delirium identification by physicians, nurses, and certified nursing assistants (CNAs) in real-world practice relative to a research reference standard delirium assessment (RSDA).

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Large urban academic medical center and small rural community hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

527 general medicine inpatients (mean age, 80 years; 35% with preexisting dementia) and 399 clinicians (53 hospitalists, 236 nurses, and 110 CNAs).

MEASUREMENTS

On 2 study days, enrolled patients had an RSDA. Subsequently, CNAs performed an ultra-brief 2-item screen (UB-2) for delirium, whereas physicians and nurses performed a 2-step protocol consisting of the UB-2 followed in those with a positive screen result by the 3-Minute Diagnostic Assessment for the Confusion Assessment Method.

RESULTS

Delirium was diagnosed in 154 of 924 RSDAs (17%) and in 114 of 527 patients (22%). The completion rate for clinician protocols exceeded 97%. The CNAs administered the UB-2 in a mean of 62 seconds (SD, 51). The 2-step protocols were administered in means of 104 seconds (SD, 99) by nurses and 106 seconds (SD, 105) by physicians. The UB-2 had sensitivities of 88% (95% CI, 72% to 96%), 87% (CI, 73% to 95%), and 82% (CI, 65% to 91%) when administered by CNAs, nurses, and physicians, respectively, with specificities of 64% to 70%. The 2-step protocol had overall accuracy of 89% (CI, 83% to 93%) and 87% (CI, 81% to 91%), with sensitivities of 65% (CI, 48% to 79%) and 63% (CI, 46% to 77%) and specificities of 93% (CI, 88% to 96%) and 91% (CI, 86% to 95%), for nurses and physicians, respectively. Two-step protocol sensitivity for moderate to severe delirium was 78% (CI, 54% to 91%).

LIMITATION

Two sites; limited diversity.

CONCLUSION

An app-directed protocol for delirium identification was feasible, brief, and accurate, and CNAs and nurses performed as well as hospitalists.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Institute on Aging.

Domains of delirium severity in Alzheimer's disease and related dementias

BACKGROUND

The ability to rate delirium severity is key to providing optimal care for persons with Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias (ADRD). Such ratings would allow clinicians to assess response to treatment, recovery time and prognosis, nursing burden and staffing needs, and to provide nuanced, appropriate patient-centered care. Given the lack of existing tools, we defined content domains for a new delirium severity instrument for use in individuals with mild to moderate ADRD, the DEL-S-AD.

METHODS

We built upon our previous study in which we created a content domain framework to inform development of a general delirium severity instrument, the DEL-S. We engaged a new expert panel to discuss issues of measurement in delirium and dementia and to determine which content domains from the prior framework were useful in characterizing delirium severity in ADRD. We also asked panelists to identify new domains. Our panel included eight interdisciplinary members with expertise in delirium and dementia. Panelists participated in two rounds of review followed by two surveys over 2 months.

RESULTS

Panelists endorsed the same content domains as for general delirium severity, including Cognitive, Level of Consciousness, Inattention, Psychiatric-Behavioral, Emotional Dysregulation, Psychomotor Features, and Functional; however, they excluded six of the original subdomains which they considered unhelpful in the context of ADRD: cognitive impairment; anxiety; fear/sense of unease; depression; gait/walking; and incontinence. Debated measurement challenges included assessment at one point in time versus over time, accounting for differences in clinical settings, and accurate assessment of symptoms related to delirium versus dementia.

CONCLUSIONS

By capturing a range of characteristics of delirium severity potentially present in patients with ADRD, a population that may already have attention, functional, and emotional changes at baseline, the DEL-S-AD provides a novel rating tool that will be useful for clinical and research purposes to improve patient care.

Predictors of Caregiver Burden in Delirium: Patient and Caregiver Factors

The current study examined the association of patient factors, patient/caregiver relationships, and living arrangements with caregiver burden due to delirium. The sample included a subset (N = 207) of hospitalized medical and surgical patients (aged >70 years) enrolled in the Better Assessment of Illness Study and their care-givers. The majority of caregivers were female (57%) and married (43%), and 47% reported living with the patient. Delirium occurred in 22% of the sample, and delirium severity, pre-existing cognitive impairment, and impairment of any activities of daily living (ADL) were associated with higher caregiver burden. However, only the ADL impairment of needing assistance with transfers was independently significantly associated with higher burden (p < 0.01). Child, child-in-law, and other relatives living with or apart from the patient reported significantly higher caregiver burden compared to spouse/partners (p < 0.01), indicating caregiver relationship and living arrangement are associated with burden. Future studies should examine additional factors contributing to delirium burden. [Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 47(9), 32-39.].

Does Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias Modify Delirium Severity and Hospital Outcomes?

OBJECTIVES

We examined the association between delirium severity and outcomes of delirium among persons with and without Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD).

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Academic tertiary medical center.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 352 medical and surgical patients.

MEASUREMENTS

Delirium incidence and severity were rated daily using the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) and CAM-Severity (CAM-S) score during hospitalization. Severe delirium was defined as a CAM-S Short Form score in the highest tertile (3-7 points out of 7). ADRD status was determined by a clinical consensus process. Clinical outcomes included prolonged length of stay (>6 d), discharge to post-acute nursing facility, any decline in activities of daily living (ADLs) at 1 month from prehospital baseline, ongoing nursing facility stay, and mortality.

RESULTS

Patients with ADRD (n = 85 [24%]) had a significantly higher relative risk (RR) for incident delirium (RR = 2.31; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.64-3.28) and higher peak CAM-S scores (mean difference = 1.24 points; CI = .83-1.65; P < .001). Among patients with ADRD, severe delirium significantly increased the RR for nursing facility stay (RR = 2.22; CI = 1.05-4.69; P = .04) and increased the RR for mortality (RR = 2.10; CI = .89-4.98; P = .09). Among patients without ADRD, severe delirium was associated with a significantly increased risk for all poor outcomes except mortality including prolonged length of stay in the hospital (RR = 1.47; CI = 1.18-1.82) and discharge to a post-acute nursing facility (RR = 2.17; CI = 1.58-2.98) plus decline in ADLs (RR = 1.30; CI = 1.05-1.60) and nursing facility stay at 1 month (RR = 1.93; CI = 1.31-2.83).

CONCLUSION

Severe delirium is associated with increased risk for poor clinical outcomes in patients with and without ADRD. In both groups, severe delirium increased risk of nursing home placement. In patients with ADRD, delirium was more severe and associated with a trend toward increased mortality at 1 month. Although the increased risk remains substantial by RR, the study had limited power to examine the rarer outcome of death. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:1722-1730, 2020.

New Delirium Severity Indicators: Generation and Internal Validation in the Better Assessment of Illness (BASIL) Study

BACKGROUND

Delirium is a common and preventable geriatric syndrome. Moving beyond the binary classification of delirium present/absent, delirium severity represents a potentially important outcome for evaluating preventive and treatment interventions and tracking the course of patients. Although several delirium severity assessment tools currently exist, most have been developed in the absence of advanced measurement methodology and have not been evaluated with rigorous validation studies.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to report our development of new delirium severity items and the results of item reduction and selection activities guided by psychometric analysis of data derived from a field study.

METHODS

Building on our literature review of delirium instruments and expert panel process to identify domains of delirium severity, we adapted items from existing delirium severity instruments and generated new items. We then fielded these items among a sample of 352 older hospitalized patients.

RESULTS

We used an expert panel process and psychometric data analysis techniques to narrow a set of 303 potential items to 17 items for use in a new delirium severity instrument. The 17-item set demonstrated good internal validity and favorable psychometric characteristics relative to comparator instruments, including the Confusion Assessment Method - Severity (CAM-S) score, the Delirium Rating Scale Revised 98, and the Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale.

CONCLUSION

We more fully conceptualized delirium severity and identified characteristics of an ideal delirium severity instrument. These characteristics include an instrument that is relatively quick to administer, is easy to use by raters with minimal training, and provides a severity rating with good content validity, high internal consistency reliability, and broad domain coverage across delirium symptoms. We anticipate these characteristics to be represented in the subsequent development of our final delirium severity instrument.

The Caregiver Burden of Delirium in Older Adults With Alzheimer Disease and Related Disorders

OBJECTIVES

To measure the burden of delirium in older adults with or without Alzheimer disease or related disorders (ADRDs).

DESIGN

Prospective, observational cohort.

SETTING

Inpatient hospital and study participants' homes.

PARTICIPANTS

A subset (n = 267) of older medical and surgical patients and their caregivers enrolled in the Better Assessment of Illness study.

MEASUREMENTS

Delirium burden was measured using the DEL-B instrument (range = 0-40, with higher scores indicating greater burden) in caregivers (DEL-B-C) and patients 1 month after hospitalization. Severity of cognitive impairment (Montreal Cognitive Assessment [MoCA]), delirium presence (Confusion Assessment Method [CAM]), and delirium severity (CAM-Severity [CAM-S]) were measured during hospitalization and at 1-month follow-up. ADRD diagnosis was determined by a clinical consensus process.

RESULTS

For patients with (n = 56) and without (n = 211) ADRD, both DEL-B instruments had good internal consistency. DEL-B-C scores had a median (interquartile range) among caregivers of patients with and without ADRD of 9 (5-15) and 5 (1-11), respectively (P < .05). If the patient developed delirium, caregivers experienced greater burden (β[delirium × ADRD] = -.29; P = .42), regardless of ADRD status. Further, caregiver burden was modestly correlated with patient MoCA scores (Spearman correlation coefficient, ρ = -0.18; P = .01). Patients with ADRD who developed delirium self-reported less burden than those without ADRD (β[delirium × ADRD] = -.67; P = .044). As with caregivers, delirium burden was modestly correlated with patient MoCA score (ρ = -0.18; P = .005) and correlated with the CAM-S in patients without ADRD (ρ = 0.38; P < .001) but not for patients with ADRD (ρ = -0.07; P = .61).

CONCLUSIONS

Delirium resulted in the same degree of increased caregiver burden regardless of whether a patient had ADRD, signifying delirium is equally stressful to caregivers, even among those with experience caring for someone with a chronic cognitive disorder. Delirium burden is only modestly associated with degree of cognitive impairment, suggesting that other aspects of delirium contribute to burden. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:2587-2592, 2019.

Use of an expert panel to identify domains and indicators of delirium severity

PURPOSE

Our purpose was to create a content domain framework for delirium severity to inform item development for a new instrument to measure delirium severity.

METHODS

We used an established, multi-stage instrument development process during which expert panelists discussed best approaches to measure delirium severity and identified related content domains. We conducted this work as part of the Better ASsessment of ILlness (BASIL) study, a prospective, observational study aimed at developing and testing measures of delirium severity. Our interdisciplinary expert panel consisted of twelve national delirium experts and four expert members of the core research group. Over a one-month period, experts participated in two rounds of review.

RESULTS

Experts recommended that the construct of delirium severity should reflect both the phenomena and the impact of delirium to create an accurate, patient-centered instrument useful to interdisciplinary clinicians and family caregivers. Final content domains were Cognitive, Level of consciousness, Inattention, Psychiatric-Behavioral, Emotional dysregulation, Psychomotor features, and Functional. Themes debated by experts included reconciling clinical geriatrics and psychiatric content, mapping symptoms to one specific domain, and accurate capture of unclear clinical presentations.

CONCLUSIONS

We believe this work represents the first application of instrument development science to delirium. The identified content domains are inclusive of various, wide-ranging domains of delirium severity and are reflective of a consistent framework that relates delirium severity to potential clinical outcomes. Our content domain framework provides a foundation for development of delirium severity instruments that can help improve care and quality of life for patients with delirium.