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

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.

Deconstructing delirium in the post anaesthesia care unit

The course of neuro-cognitive recovery following anaesthesia and surgery is distinctive and poorly understood. Our objective was to identify patterns of neuro-cognitive recovery of the domains routinely assessed for delirium diagnosis in the post anaesthesia care unit (PACU) and to compare them to the cognitive recovery patterns observed in other studies; thereby aiding in the identification of pathological (high risk) patterns of recovery in the PACU. We also compared which of the currently available tests (3D-CAM, CAM-ICU, and NuDESC) is the best to use in PACU. This was a post hoc secondary analysis of data from the Alpha Max study which involved 200 patients aged over 60 years, scheduled for elective surgery under general anaesthesia lasting more than 2 h. These patients were assessed for delirium at 30 min following arrival in the PACU, if they were adequately arousable (Richmond Agitation Sedation Score ≥ −2). All tests for delirium diagnosis (3D-CAM, CAM-ICU, and NuDESC) and the sub-domains assessed were compared to understand temporal recovery of neurocognitive domains. These data were also analysed to determine the best predictor of PACU delirium. We found the incidence of PACU delirium was 35% (3D-CAM). Individual cognitive domains were affected differently. Few individuals had vigilance deficits (6.5%, n = 10 CAM-ICU) or disorganized thinking (19% CAM-ICU, 27.5% 3D-CAM), in contrast attention deficits were common (72%, n = 144) and most of these patients (89.5%, n = 129) were not sedated (RASS ≥ −2). CAM-ICU (27%) and NuDESC (52.8%) detected fewer cases of PACU delirium compared to 3D-CAM. In conclusion, return of neurocognitive function is a stepwise process; Vigilance and Disorganized Thinking are the earliest cognitive functions to return to baseline and lingering deficits in these domains could indicate an abnormal cognitive recovery. Attention deficits are relatively common at 30 min in the PACU even in individuals who appear to be awake. The 3D CAM is a robust test to check for delirium in the PACU.

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.

Delirium: A Marker of Vulnerability in Older People

Delirium is an acute neuropsychiatric syndrome and one of the most common presenting symptoms of acute medical illnesses in older people. Delirium can be triggered by a single cause, but in most cases, it is multifactorial as it depends on the interaction between predisposing and precipitating factors. Delirium is highly prevalent in older patients across various settings of care and correlates with an increased risk of adverse clinical outcomes. Several pathophysiological mechanisms may contribute to its onset, including neurotransmitter imbalance, neuroinflammation, altered brain metabolism, and impaired neuronal network connectivity. Several screening and diagnostic tools for delirium exist, but they are unfortunately underutilized. Additionally, the diagnosis of delirium superimposed on dementia poses a formidable challenge – especially if dementia is severe. Non-pharmacological approaches for the prevention and multidomain interventions for the treatment of delirium are recommended, given that there is currently no robust evidence of drugs that can prevent or resolve delirium. This article aims to review the current understanding about delirium in older people. To achieve this goal, we will describe the epidemiology and outcomes of the syndrome, the pathophysiological mechanisms that are supposed to be involved, the most commonly used tools for screening and diagnosis, and prevention strategies and treatments recommended. This review is intended as a brief guide for clinicians in hospital wards to improve their knowledge and practice. At the end of the article, we propose an approach to improve the quality of care provided to older patients throughout a systematic detection of delirium.

Succinct Approach to Delirium in the Emergency Department

Purpose of Review

This study aims to provide a concise delirium review for practicing emergency medicine providers using the Assess, Diagnose, Evaluate, Prevent, and Treat (ADEPT) framework.

Recent Findings

Delirium is a form of acute brain dysfunction that results in significant mortality and morbidity for older emergency department (ED) patients. Delirium is frequently missed by healthcare providers, but monitoring for this syndrome using brief delirium assessments may improve recognition. Once delirium is diagnosed, emergency medicine providers' primary goal is to perform a comprehensive history and physical examination to uncover the underlying etiology for delirium. This includes obtaining history from a collateral historian and obtaining an accurate medication history. If posssible, emergency physicians (EPs) should treat the medical etiology that precipitated the delirium. If agitated, non-pharmacologic interventions such that minimize the use of tethers are preferred. Pharmacologic agents such as antipsychotic medications should be used as a last resort.

Summary

Delirium is a common geriatric emergency and requires the EP to assess, diagnose, evaluate, prevent, and treat. Delirium is a key geriatric syndrome that geriatric ED providers should routinely screen for. A strong emphasis is on the widespread use of delirium screening, followed by prevention and treatment efforts.

Screening instruments for cognitive impairment in older patients in the Emergency Department: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

cognitive impairment is highly prevalent among older patients attending the Emergency Department (ED) and is associated with adverse outcomes.

Methods

we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of cognitive screening instruments to rule out cognitive impairment in older patients in the ED. A comprehensive literature search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and CENTRAL. A risk of bias assessment using QUADAS-2 was performed.

Results

23 articles, examining 18 different index tests were included. Only seven index tests could be included in the meta-analysis. For ruling out cognitive impairment irrespective of aetiology, Ottawa 3 Day Year (O3DY) (pooled sensitivity 0.90; (95% CI) 0.71–0.97) had the highest sensitivity. Fourteen articles focused on screening for cognitive impairment specifically caused by delirium. For ruling out delirium, the 4 A’s Test (4AT) showed highest sensitivity (pooled sensitivity 0.87, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.74–0.94).

Conclusions

high clinical and methodological heterogeneity was found between included studies. Therefore, it is a challenge to recommend one diagnostic test for use as a screening instrument for cognitive impairment in the ED. The 4AT and O3DY seem most promising for ruling out cognitive impairment in older patients attending the ED.

The review protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42018082509).

Optimizing the month of the year backwards test for delirium screening of older patients in the emergency department

INTRODUCTION

Different scoring methods exist for the Month of the Year Backward Test (MBT), which is designed to detect inattention, the core feature of delirium. When used as a part of the modified Confusion Assessment Method for the Emergency Department (mCAM-ED), each error in the MBT scores one point. Because this scoring procedure is complex, we aimed to simplify the scoring method of the MBT.

METHODS

This is a secondary analysis of a single center prospective validation study of the mCAM-ED comprising a sample of Emergency Department (ED) patients aged 65 or older presenting to our ED.

DATA COLLECTION

Research assistants (RAs) who were trained nurses conducted the MBT. Geriatricians conducted the reference standard delirium assessment within 1 h of the RA.

RESULTS

For the scoring method "number of errors", optimal performance according the Youden index was achieved when 8 or more errors were reached resulting in an overall sensitivity of 0.95 and overall specificity of 0.94. The scoring method "number of errors in combination with time needed" resulted in a comparable result with minimally lower positive likelihood ratios. For the scoring method "last month in correct order", optimal performance according the Youden index was achieved with the month of September resulting in an overall sensitivity of 0.90 and an overall specificity of 0.89.

DISCUSSION

We suggest omitting the factor time and using a more practical scoring method with good performance: "last month in correct order" with the requirement to reach September to rule out delirium.