Confusion Assessment Method in the diagnostics of delirium among aged hospital patients: Would it serve better in screening than as a diagnostic instrument?
ABSTRACT The Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) is an easy, four-step algorithmic diagnostic test developed to detect delirium.
To determine how sensitive and specific the CAM is in diagnosing delirium when compared with fully operationalized criteria of delirium according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) editions III, III revised, and IV, and the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) 10th edition.
A cross-sectional study with blinded assessments was performed on consecutive elderly patients (>70 years) (n=81) in two acute geriatric hospitals in Helsinki, Finland. The sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, and positive and negative predictive values of CAM were assessed with the DSM-III, DSM-III-R, DSM-IV, and ICD-10 criteria of delirium used as reference standards.
Sensitivity rates of the CAM were proved to be only moderate (0.81-0.86) against all formal criteria of delirium. The specificity rates were lower (0.63-0.84), and far less than reported in previous studies using global assessment of the reference standard. Instead of the DSM-III-R, from which it is derived, the CAM seems more concordant with the DSM-IV criteria of delirium. The likelihood ratio for a positive CAM test was 5.06 and for a negative test 0.23, when compared with the DSM-IV.
The CAM seems to be an acceptable screening instrument for delirium, but the diagnosis should be ensured according to the formal criteria of delirium, preferably by the DSM-IV.
Full-textDOI: · Available from: Reijo S Tilvis, Jun 19, 2015
- SourceAvailable from: Lap Fung Tsang[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Background A high prevalence for the development of delirium after hip fracture was found in the group of geriatric patients. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence has introduced a guideline for the management delirium (NICE, 2010). Protocols composed of detection, prevention and management of post-operative delirium required some adaptation to meet the needs of local nurses. Aim A protocol with a nursing care plan referenced from an international guideline and other literature was developed to predict, prevent and manage post-operative delirium for geriatric patients with hip fracture. Methods The literature suggests numerous risk factors are associated with post-operative delirium and its preventive interventions were adopted to develop the protocol and nursing care plan. Findings Six major risk categories included mental and behavioural influence, sensory impairment, physiological influence, immobility influence, electrolyte disturbance and infection influence. These were used for screening patients, accompanied by various preventive interventions. A protocol was developed to strive for the best management of geriatric patients receiving hip fracture surgery from admission to discharge. Conclusions The protocol incorporated with the Risk Assessment for Management of Postoperative delirium (RAMP) care plan was adapted for staff to implement in their local clinical area. Further study is required to determine its effectiveness on the prevention of the development of post operative delirium (POD) in the future.International Journal of Orthopaedic and Trauma Nursing 01/2013; DOI:10.1016/j.ijotn.2013.06.001
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This review describes the characteristics and evaluates the psychometric qualities (process of testing and the results) of thirteen delirium instruments. Delirium instruments differ in goal (diagnosis, screening symptoms severity), type of data on which the rating is based (observation, interview or test of patients), the rater qualities required, the number of items and the rating time needed. Most instruments are based on the Diagnostic Statistical Manual criteria and measure signs and symptoms as described by these criteria. Reliability of delirium instruments shows good to excellent results. Validity of the delirium instruments is overall fair to good. Differences exist, however, in the degree to which reliability and validity were tested and the quality of the testing procedures. Most instruments are not further developed and tested after the initial study. Conclusion of this review is that most delirium instruments show promising results but need further testing. Testing is needed in different samples and on a broader range of aspects with regard to reliability and validity. Much emphasis should be given to the procedures used in future studies. Ease of use is an aspect of testing that is so far not taken into account, however, is important for use of instruments in clinical practice. A minority of instruments can be seen as "ready to use" instruments meaning well tested in more than one sample with good results. For screening high-risk, elderly hospitalized patients, the NEECHAM Confusion Scale and the Delirium Observation Screening Scale are recommended. The Confusion Assessment Method is the best diagnostic tool and the Delirium Rating Scale shows best results in screening symptom severity. For ICU patients the CAM-ICU is recommended. The MDAS is well tested in cancer patients. Nurses, however, have not yet tested the DRS and MDAS in practice.Research and theory for nursing practice 02/2003; 17(3):207-24. DOI:10.1891/rtnp.220.127.116.11186 · 0.61 Impact Factor
- Noropsikiyatri Arsivi 12/2014; 51(4):376-382. DOI:10.5152/npa.2014.6999 · 0.13 Impact Factor