Article

The Delirium Observation Screening Scale: a screening instrument for delirium.

Department of Nursing Science, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Research and theory for nursing practice (Impact Factor: 0.61). 02/2003; 17(1):31-50. DOI: 10.1891/rtnp.17.1.31.53169
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The Delirium Observation Screening (DOS) scale, a 25-item scale, was developed to facilitate early recognition of delirium, according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual-IV criteria, based on nurses' observations during regular care. The scale was tested for content validity by a group of seven experts in the field of delirium. Internal consistency, predictive validity, and concurrent and construct validity were tested in two prospective studies with high risk groups of patients: geriatric medicine patients and elderly hip fracture patients. Among the patients admitted to a geriatric department (N = 82), 4 became delirious; among the elderly hip fracture patients (N = 92), 18 became delirious. The DOS scale was determined to be content valid and showed high internal consistency, alpha = 0.93 and alpha = 0.96. Predictive validity against the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual-IV diagnosis of delirium made by a geriatrician was good in both studies. Correlations of the DOS scale with the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) were Rs -0.79 (p < or = 0.001) in the hip fracture patients and Rs -0.66 (p < or = 0.001) in the geriatric medicine patients. Concurrent validity, as tested by comparison of the research nurse's ratings of the DOS scale and the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM), for the group of hip fracture patients was 0.63 (p < or = 0.001). Construct validity of the DOS was tested against the Informant Questionnaire of Cognitive Decline in Elderly (IQCODE), a preexisting psychiatric diagnosis and the Barthel Index. Correlation with the IQCODE was 0.74 (p < or = 0.001) in the study with the hip fracture patients and 0.33 (p < or = 0.05) in the study with the geriatric medicine patients. Correlation with the Barthel Index was -0.26 (p < or = 0.05) in the geriatric medicine patients and -0.55 (p < or = 0.001) in the hip fracture patients. The overall conclusion of these studies is that the DOS scale shows satisfactory validity and reliability, to guide early recognition of delirium by nurses' observation.

13 Followers
 · 
1,222 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Delirium, an acute disorder with high morbidity and mortality, is often preventable through multicomponent nonpharmacological strategies. The efficacy of these strategies for preventing subsequent adverse outcomes has been limited to small studies to date. To evaluate available evidence on multicomponent nonpharmacological delirium interventions in reducing incident delirium and preventing poor outcomes associated with delirium. PubMed, Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from January 1, 1999, to December 31, 2013. Studies examining the following outcomes were included: delirium incidence, falls, length of stay, rate of discharge to a long-term care institution (institutionalization), and change in functional or cognitive status. Two experienced physician reviewers independently and blindly abstracted data on outcome measures using a standardized approach. The reviewers conducted quality ratings based on the Cochrane risk-of-bias criteria for each study. We identified 14 interventional studies. The results for outcomes of delirium incidence, falls, length of stay, and institutionalization were pooled for the meta-analysis, but heterogeneity limited our meta-analysis of the results for change in functional or cognitive status. Overall, 11 studies demonstrated significant reductions in delirium incidence (odds ratio [OR], 0.47; 95% CI, 0.38-0.58). Four randomized or matched trials reduced delirium incidence by 44% (OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.42-0.76). The rate of falls decreased significantly among intervention patients in 4 studies (OR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.25-0.60); in 2 randomized or matched trials, the rate of falls was reduced by 64% (OR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.22-0.61). Length of stay and institutionalization also trended toward decreases in the intervention groups, with a mean difference of -0.16 (95% CI, -0.97 to 0.64) day shorter and the odds of institutionalization 5% lower (OR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.71-1.26). Among higher-quality randomized or matched trials, length of stay trended -0.33 (95% CI, -1.38 to 0.72) day shorter, and the odds of institutionalization trended 6% lower (OR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.69-1.30). Multicomponent nonpharmacological delirium prevention interventions are effective in reducing delirium incidence and preventing falls, with a trend toward decreasing length of stay and avoiding institutionalization. Given the current focus on prevention of hospital-based complications and improved cost-effectiveness of care, this meta-analysis supports the use of these interventions to advance acute care for older persons.
    JAMA Internal Medicine 02/2015; DOI:10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.7779 · 13.25 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Several risk stratification instruments for postoperative delirium in older people have been developed because early interventions may prevent delirium. We investigated the performance and agreement of nine commonly used risk stratification instruments in an independent validation cohort of consecutive elective and emergency surgical patients aged >50 years with >1 risk factor for postoperative delirium. Data was collected prospectively. Delirium was diagnosed according to DSM-IV-TR criteria. The observed incidence of postoperative delirium was calculated per risk score per risk stratification instrument. In addition, the risk stratification instruments were compared in terms of area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC), and positive and negative predictive value. Finally, the positive agreement between the risk stratification instruments was calculated. When data required for an exact implementation of the original risk stratification instruments was not available, we used alternative data that was comparable. The study population included 292 patients: 60% men; mean age (SD), 66 (8) years; 90% elective surgery. The incidence of postoperative delirium was 9%. The maximum observed incidence per risk score was 50% (95%CI, 15– 85%); for eight risk stratification instruments, the maximum observed incidence per risk score was #25%. The AUC (95%CI) for the risk stratification instruments varied between 0.50 (0.36–0.64) and 0.66 (0.48–0.83). No AUC was statistically significant from 0.50 (p>0.11). Positive predictive values of the risk stratification instruments varied between 0–25%, negative predictive values between 89–95%. Positive agreement varied between 0-66%. No risk stratification instrument showed clearly superior performance. In conclusion, in this independent validation cohort, the performance and agreement of commonly used risk stratification instruments for postoperative delirium was poor. Although some caution is needed because the risk stratification instruments were not implemented exactly as described in the original studies, we think that their usefulness in clinical practice can be questioned.
    PLoS ONE 12/2014; 9(12):e113946. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0113946 · 3.53 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Rehabilitation providers who provide services to older adults with movement dysfunction will likely encounter patients with delirium, depression, mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and dementia. Alterations in cognitive status and mood often interfere with the management of the patient's primary movement problem. Although physicians and mental health providers manage the primary diagnosis and treatment of these conditions, rehabilitation therapists must recognize signs and symptoms of these common geriatric conditions. However, health care workers are inconsistent in recognizing and differentiating delirium, MCI, dementia, and depression. Therefore, older adult patients should be assessed frequently using standardized tools to facilitate prompt identification and management of the underlying etiology. There are many valid and reliable screening tools that rehabilitation therapists may use to assess changes in mental status or mood in older adults. If delirium, depression, MCI, or dementia is confirmed by the screening results, referral to the primary physician and/or the neuropsychologist is optimal. The purpose of this article was to provide a resource of information about assessment tools for delirium, depression, MCI, and dementia, which therapists may effectively and efficiently apply in a clinical setting.
    Topics in Geriatric Rehabilitation 01/2012; 28(3):137-147. DOI:10.1097/TGR.0b013e318257d0de · 0.14 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
644 Downloads
Available from
May 21, 2014