ArticlePDF Available

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, α = 0.93 and α = 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 R s -0.79 (p ≤ 0.001) in the hip fracture patients and Rs -0.66 (p ≤ 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 ≤ 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 ≤ 0.001) in the study with the hip fracture patients and 0.33 (p ≤ 0.05) in the study with the geriatric medicine patients. Correlation with the Barthel Index was -0.26 (p ≤ 0.05) in the geriatric medicine patients and -0.55 (p ≤ 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.
Delirium Observation Screening Scale (DOS)
Schuurmans MJ, Shortridge-Baggett LM, Duursma SA. The Delirium Observation
Screening Scale: a screening instrument for delirium. Res Theory Nurs Pract
2003;17(1):31-50.
Observations never sometimes usually always
Consciousness
1. reacts normally to addressing 4 3 2 1
2. dozes during conversation or activities 1 2 3 4
3. stares into space 1 2 3 4
Attention/concentration
4. is easily distracted by stimuli from the environment 1 2 3 4
5. maintains attention to conversation or action 4 3 2 1
6. does not finish question or answer 1 2 3 4
thinking
7. gives answers that do not fit the question 1 2 3 4
8. talks slowly or answers slowly 1 2 3 4
9. reacts slowly to instructions 1 2 3 4
10. speaks incoherently 1 2 3 4
11. is suspicious 1 2 3 4
Memory/orientation
12. thinks to be somewhere else 1 2 3 4
13. knows which part of the day it is 4 3 2 1
14. remember recent event 4 3 2 1
Psychomotor activity
15. is picking, disorderly, restless 1 2 3 4
16. hardly moves 1 2 3 4
17. pulls IV tubes, feeding tubes, catheters, etc. 1 2 3 4
18. has unnatural position in bed 1 2 3 4
Sleep/wake cycle
19. is sleep/drowsy during the day 1 2 3 4
20. (night shift) has vivid and frightening dreams during the night 1 2 3 4
21. (night shift) is awake/wakes up restlessly 1 2 3 4
Mood
22. is easily or suddenly emotional (frightened, angry, irritated) 1 2 3 4
23. is apathetic/weary 1 2 3 4
Perception
24. sees persons/things as somebody/something else 1 2 3 4
25. sees/hears things that are not there 1 2 3 4
13 items DOS scale
OBSERVATION
The patient
Day shift
Evening
shift
night shift
TOTAL
SCORE
TODAY
( 0 -
39)
never
sometimes
-
always
unable
never
sometimes
- always
unable
never
sometimes
-
always
unable
1
Dozes of during conversation or
activities
0
1
-
0
1
-
0
1
-
2
is easy distracted by stimuli from
the environment
0
1
-
0
1
-
0
1
-
3
Maintains attention to
conversation or action
1
0
-
1
0
-
1
0
-
4
Does not finish question or
answer
0
1
-
0
1
-
0
1
-
5
Gives answers that do not fit the
question
0
1
-
0
1
-
0
1
-
6
Reacts slowly to instructions
0
1
-
0
1
-
0
1
-
7
Thinks to be somewhere else
0
1
-
0
1
-
0
1
-
8
Knows which part of the day it is
1
0
-
1
0
-
1
0
-
9
Remembers recent event
1
0
-
1
0
-
1
0
-
10
Is picking, disorderly, restless
0
1
-
0
1
-
0
1
-
11
Pulls ivtubes, feeding tubes,
catheters etc.
0
1
-
0
1
-
0
1
-
12
Is easy or sudden emotional
0
1
-
0
1
-
0
1
-
13
Sees/hears things which are not
there
0
1
-
0
1
-
0
1
-
TOTAL SCORE PER SHIFT (0 - 13)
DOS SCALE FINAL SCORE = TOTAL SCORE TODAY / 3
DOS SCALE final
score
< 3 not delirious
3 Probably
delirious
Directions for use
The Delirium Observation Screening Scale is a 13-item observational scale of verbal
and nonverbal behavior. The observations can be done during regular care. To
optimize recognition of delirium, recording of observations per shift is important.
Rating
never During this shift, in contacts with the patient the described behavior was
not observed (CIRCLE THE APPROPRIATE NUMBER IN THIS
COLUMN)
sometimes- During this shift, in contacts with the patient the described behavior was
always observed once, or a few times or even all the time (CIRCLE THE
APPROPRIATE NUMBER IN THIS COLUMN)
unable During this shift, in contacts with the patient the described behavior
was not observed since the patient was asleep or did not give ecessary
verbal responses OR the rater does not find himself/herself competent
to observe the absence or presence of the behavior (CIRCLE -)
Directions for scoring
- For each shift the total score is calculated by counting the circled ratings.
- Adding the total scores per shift gives the total score for today.
- The DOS Scare final score is calculated by dividing the total score for today by 3;
For the version with 13 items, two score are allotted:
Never = 0 points;
Sometimes or always from = 1 point
For the 25 item-version
Items were rated on a 4 point Likert scale based on the frequency of occurrence of
the behavioural change:
1 = never (no alteration of behaviour)
2 = sometimes
3 = usually
4 = always
Traduction: Delirium Observation Screening Scale (DOS)
Schuurmans MJ, Shortridge-Baggett LM, Duursma SA. The Delirium Observation
Screening Scale: a screening instrument for delirium.
Observations Jamais Parfois habituellement
Toujours
Conscience
1.
réagit normalement lorsque l’on s’adresse à lui
4
3
2
1
2.
somnole pendant la conversation ou les activités 1 2 3
4
3.
regarde fixement dans l'espace 1 2 3
4
Attention/concentration
4.
est facilement distrait par des stimulus
de
l'environnement 1 2 3
4
5.
maintient l'attention à la conversation ou à
l'action 4 3 2
1
6.
ne finit pas la question ou la réponse 1 2 3
4
Pensée
7.
donne les réponses qui ne correspondent pas à la
question 1 2 3
4
8.
Parle lentement, prend son temps pour répondre 1 2 3
4
9.
réagit lentement aux instructions 1 2 3
4
10
parle de façon incohérente 1 2 3
4
11.
Est soupçonneux
1
2
3
4
Mémoire/orientation
12.
Pense être ailleurs que là où il se trouve
1
2
3
4
13
Connaît le moment de la journée où on est 4 3 2
1
14.
Se rappellent les événements récents 4 3 2
1
Activités psychomotrices
15.
Est confus, agité
1
2
3
4
16.
Se déplace difficilement
1
2
3
4
17.
Tire sur les tuyaux IV, les sondes
d’alimentation, cathéters, etc. 1 2 3
4
18.
N’a pas une position naturelle dans son lit 1 2 3
4
Cycle veille/sommeil
19.
Est endormi/somnolent le jour
1
2
3
4
20.
Fait des rêves vifs et effrayants la nuit
1
2
3
4
21.
(la nuit) est réveillé/ se réveille avec agit
ation
1
2
3
4
Humeur
22.
A facilement ou soudainement des émotions
(effra, fâché, irrité) 1 2 3
4
23.
Est apathique
1
2
3
4
Perception
24.
Voit des choses/ des personnes comme d’autres
personnes ou d’autres choses 1 2 3
4
25.
Voit/entend des choses qui ne sont pas 1 2 3
4
DOS- Version à 13 items
OBSERVATION
The patient
Day shift
Evening shift
night shift
Score
total
journalier
( 0 - 39)
jamais
Parfois -
toujours
inapplicable
jamais
Parfois -
toujours
inapplicable
jamais
Parfois -
toujours
inapplicable
1
somnole pendant la
conversation ou les activités
0
1
-
0
1
-
0
1
-
2
est facilement distrait par des
stimulus de l'environnement
0
1
-
0
1
-
0
1
-
3
maintient l'attention à la
conversation ou l'action
1
0
-
1
0
-
1
0
-
4
ne termine pas la réponse à la
question
0
1
-
0
1
-
0
1
-
5
donne des réponses qui ne
correspondent pas à la question
0
1
-
0
1
-
0
1
-
6
réagit lentement aux
instructions
0
1
-
0
1
-
0
1
-
7
pensent être ailleurs
0
1
-
0
1
-
0
1
-
8
connaît le moment de la
journée
1
0
-
1
0
-
1
0
-
9
se rappelle les évènements
récents
1
0
-
1
0
-
1
0
-
10
est touché, agité, confus
0
1
-
0
1
-
0
1
-
11
tire sur les tubulures Iv, les
sonde d’alimentation, les
cathéters,…
0
1
-
0
1
-
0
1
-
12
Accès émotifs soudain (effrayé
fâché, irrité)
0
1
-
0
1
-
0
1
-
13
Voit les personnes/les choses
comme d’autres
personnes/choses
0
1
-
0
1
-
0
1
-
Score Total par pause de travail (0 - 13)
DOS SCORE FINAL = SCORE TOTAL JOURNALIER / 3
DOS SCALE final score
< 3
Pas de confusion
présente
3
Probable confusion
Directives pour l’utilisation
Compléter le DOS prend moins de cinq minutes et ne requiert pas la participation du
patient. Les observations peuvent être réalisées durant les soins routiniers.
Le Delirium Observation Screening Scale est une échelle d’observation du
comportement verbal et non verbal. Les observations peuvent être récoltées durant
les soins routiniers. Pour améliorer la reconnaissance de la confusion, enregistrer les
observation par pause de travail est important.
Jamais Le comportement décrit n’a jamais été observe pendant cette pause de
travail (entourer le nombre approprié dans la colonne)
parfois- Le comportement décrit a été observe quelque fois ou toujours durant
toujours cette pose de travail (entourer le nombre approprié dans la colonne)
inaplicable Le comportement décrit n’a pas été observe parce que, Durant cette
pause, le patient est endormi ou ne sait pas donner de réponse verbale
ou l’observateur ne se jujeait pas competent pour observer l’absence ou
la presence du comportmement . (entourer le nombre approprié dans la
colonne)
Directives pour l’attribution du score
- Pour chaque pause de travail, le score total est calculé par la somme des points
entourés
- Le score total est formé de l’addition des résultats par pause de travail
- Le score final est obtenu par la division du score total par 3;
Pour la version à 13 items, deux scores sont attribués :
Jamais = 0 point ;
Parfois ou toujours de = 1 point
Pour la version à 25 items, les items sont évalués sur une échelle de 4 points basée
sur la fréquence du changement comportemental :
1 = jamais (aucun changement de comportement)
2 = parfois
3 = habituellement
4 = toujours
Pour quatre des items ( 1, 5 ; 13 ; 14), l’attribution du score est inversée
Le score total est obtenu par l’addition des scores des différents items.
... A pneumonia was considered hospital acquired pneumonia (HAP) if the symptoms arose > 48 h after admission. CDC-criteria (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [7]) were used to assess whether it was a systemic urinary tract infection and a DOS score (Delirium Observation Screening [8]) of 3 or higher was used to assess whether a patient had delirium. For Unknown underlying medical suffering such as anaemia or cardiac arrhythmia were also included in these adverse events. ...
Article
Full-text available
Purpose Older trauma patients (65 years or older), who suffer minor or moderate injury for which immediate hospitalization is not strictly indicated, are often admitted to the hospital due to a self-sufficiency problem. Although hospitalization is expensive and associated with risks, little is known about the course of such a social admission. Therefore, the aim of this study was to clarify the course and outcome of social admissions. Methods A single centre retrospective cohort study was performed in a level II trauma centre. All hospitalized trauma patients aged 65 or older between 2015 and 2021 with an Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS) code of 1 or 2 were included. The primary outcome was defined as the number of complications during admission (e.g. pneumonia, urinary tract infection, delirium, decubitus and, in-hospital mortality). Secondary outcomes were missed injury, length of stay, discharge location (home, with homecare or a skilled nursing facility), 30-day hospital return and 1-year mortality. Results Out of 2900 older hospitalized trauma patients, 563 (19.4%) were included. Complications occurred in 99 patients (17.6%), eight patients (1.4%) died during admission, and in 17 patients (3.0%) a previously missed injury was found during the admission. The median length of stay was 5 days [IQR 2.00–9.00] and of all independent living patients, 49.1% could be discharged to their homes. After discharge, 4.4% of the patients returned within 30 days and, a total of 17.6% of all patients died within one year after discharge. Conclusions One out of five older trauma patients presenting at the emergency department were admitted because of social reasons. Social admissions are lengthy and are accompanied by a considerable amount of complications.
... For instance, to demonstrate primary and psychosocial functions and activities of a patient's daily living, the Katz Activities of Daily Living Scale [11], the Lawton Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Scale [12], the Barthel index [13], and the Tinetti test [14] may be applied. Moreover, regarding mental assessment, all available scales may be divided into three categories based on the application: (1) cognitive usage, including the mini-mental state examination (MMSE) [15] and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) [16], as well as the Abbreviated Mental Test score (AMTS) [17] and the Clock-Drawing Test (CDT) [18]; (2) emotional state, including the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) [19]; and (3) qualitative disorders of consciousness, such as the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) [20] or the Delirium Observation Scale (DOS) [21]. Based on these questionnaires, clinical and healthcare professionals can obtain a general overview of a patient's mental status, and they may rate their depression level and assess their potential disturbing cognitive impairments and signs of dementia [12]. ...
Article
Full-text available
In Poland, the elderly population is noticeably increasing every year. Therefore, the current healthcare system has to rise to the challenge of treatment and prevention strategies targeting elderly persons. Based on the Vulnerable Elders Survey (VES-13 scale), consisting of international and validated scales, we put effort into identifying the factors affecting the increased percentage of CGA (Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment) recommendations by healthcare system physicians. The study group involved 78 patients from the Department of Geriatrics, Wroclaw Medical University, Poland, aged 60–91 (median Me = 81 years old). Of the studied patients, 51 were recommended for CGA (51/78; 64.6%). A statistically significant association was observed between CGA recommendation and age (p < 0.001); the likelihood of a CGA recommendation increased with age. Furthermore, the increased CGA recommendation was observed among geriatric patients with: (a) frailty syndrome (OR = 11.2, CI95% 2.88–43.5, p < 0.001), (b) high risk of malnutrition or malnutrition (OR = 3.87; CI95%, 1.00–14.9, p = 0.04), (c) low mental status (OR = 3.32, CI95% 1.22–9.09, p = 0.029), (d) low ability to perform basic daily duties (according to ADL scale—OR = 12.6, CI95% 1.57–101, p = 0.004 and IADL scale—OR = 4.71, CI95% 1.72–12.9, p = 0.003), and (e) fall risk (OR = 15.0, CI95% 4.67–48.3, p < 0.001). Moreover, homocysteine levels increased with age (p = 0.003) and decreased with sleep duration (p = 0.043). Taken together, all these factors seem to be important when implementing treatment programs adjusted to the individual geriatric patient.
... The Delirium Observation Screening (DOS) Scale was carried out for every patient (in ICU, IMC and on normal ward) [25]. The used DOS version consists of 13 questions about early symptoms of delirium that nurses could observe during regular care. ...
Article
Full-text available
(1) Background: Postoperative delirium (POD) poses a high risk of worsening outcomes for patients and is also a burden for hospitals. The leading guidelines recommend standardized POD assessment and prevention. The aim of this subgroup analysis of the PRe-Operative Prediction of Postoperative DElirium by Appropriate SCreening (PROPDESC) trial was to compare different delirium assessments and to analyse the frequency of POD on five postoperative days. (2) Methods: This prospective observational trial enrolled 1097 patients in a university hospital from 2018 until 2019. The following POD assessment tools were used for five consecutive days: Confusion Assessment Method for ICU (CAM-ICU) or Confusion Assessment Method for normal ward (CAM), 4 A’s Test (4AT) and Delirium Observation Screening (DOS) scale. (3) Results: In a 5-day visit interval, most new POD developments occurred on the first and second postoperative day. A clear recommendation for a specific POD assessment tool based on our results cannot be given. (4) Conclusions: According to guidelines, a POD assessment should take place on the first five postoperative days, but of these, the first two are those of highest POD occurrence. The POD assessment tool used should at best include direct patient questioning and aspects of patient observation.
Article
Objective: To investigate the relationship between history of anti-inflammatory medication use and delirium risk, as well as long-term mortality. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, subjects recruited between January 2016 and March 2020 were analyzed. Information about anti-inflammatory medication use history including aspirin, NSAIDs, glucosamine, and other anti-inflammatory drugs, was collected. Logistic regression analysis investigated the relationship between anti-inflammatory medications and delirium. Log-rank analysis and cox proportional hazards model investigated the relationship between anti-inflammatory medications and one-year mortality. Results: The data from 1274 subjects were analyzed. The prevalence of delirium was significantly lower in subjects with NSAIDs usage (23.0%) than in those without NSAIDs usage (35.0%) (p < 0.001). Logistic regression analysis controlling for age, sex, dementia status, and hospitalization department showed that the risk of delirium tended to be reduced by a history of NSAIDs use (OR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.55 to 1.03]). The one-year mortality in the subjects with NSAIDs (survival rate, 0.879 [95% CI, 0.845 to 0.906]) was significantly higher than in the subjects without NSAIDs (survival rate, 0.776 [95% CI, 0.746 to 0.803]) (p < 0.001). A history of NSAIDs use associated with the decreased risk of one-year mortality even after adjustment for age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index, delirium status, and hospitalization department (HR, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.51 to 0.96]). Conclusion: This study suggested that NSAIDs usage was associated with decreased delirium prevalence and lower one-year mortality. The potential benefit of NSAIDs on delirium risk and mortality were shown.
Article
Delirium, which may present as acute fluctuation in arousal and attention and changes in a person's behaviours, can increase the risk of falls, while a fall can increase the risk of developing delirium. There is, therefore, a fundamental relationship between delirium and falls. This article describes the main types of delirium and the challenges associated with recognition of the condition and discusses the relationship between delirium and falls. The article also describes some of the validated tools used to screen patients for delirium and includes two brief case studies to illustrate this in practice.
Chapter
In dit hoofdstuk wordt de acuut zieke patiënt op de afdeling behandeld. Ruim aandacht wordt besteed aan tijdige onderkenning van een verslechterende opgenomen patiënt, middels een early-warning-systematiek. Bij acute verslechtering van een patiënt kan een spoedinterventieteam (SIT) worden gebeld.
Article
Full-text available
Introduction The clinical relevance of post-operative delirium (POD) in neurosurgery remains unclear and should be investigated as these patients are vulnerable. Hence we investigated the impact of POD, by means of incidence and health outcomes, and identified independent risk factors. Methods Adult patients undergoing an intracranial surgical procedure in the Erasmus MC Rotterdam between June 2017 and September 2020 were retrospectively included. POD incidence, defined in case of a Delirium Observation Screening Scale (DOSS)≥3 or antipsychotic treatment for delirium within 5 days after surgery, was calculated. Logistic regression analysis on the full data set was conducted for the multivariable risk factor and health outcome analyses. Results After including 2901 intracranial surgical procedures, POD was present in 19.4% with a mean (SD) onset in days of 2.62 (1.22) and associated with more Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admissions and more discharge towards residential care. Onset of POD was not associated with increased length of hospitalization or mortality. We identified several independent non-modifiable risk factors such as age, pre-existing memory problems, emergency operations, craniotomy compared to burr-hole surgery and severe blood loss. Moreover, we identified modifiable risk factors such as low pre-operative potassium and opioid and dexamethasone administration. Conclusions Our POD incidence rates and correlation with more ICU admission and discharge towards residential care suggest a significant impact of POD on neurosurgical patients. We identified several modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors, which shed light on the pathophysiologic mechanisms of POD in this cohort and could be targeted for future intervention studies.
Article
Background: Postoperative patients who were previously engaged in the live musical intervention Meaningful Music in Healthcare reported significantly reduced perception of pain than patients without the intervention. This encouraging finding indicates a potential for postsurgical musical interventions to have a place in standard care as therapeutic pain relief. However, live music is logistically complex in hospital settings, and previous studies have reported the more cost-effective recorded music to serve as a similar pain-reducing function in postsurgical patients. Moreover, little is known about the potential underlying physiological mechanisms that may be responsible for the reduced pain perceived by patients after the live music intervention. Objective: The primary objective is to see whether a live music intervention can significantly lower perceived postoperative pain compared to a recorded music intervention and do-nothing control. The secondary objective is to explore the neuroinflammatory underpinnings of postoperative pain and the potential role of a music intervention in mitigating neuroinflammation. Methods: This intervention study will compare subjective postsurgical pain ratings among 3 groups: live music intervention, recorded music intervention, and standard care control. The design will take the form of an on-off nonrandomized controlled trial. Adult patients undergoing elective surgery will be invited to participate. The intervention is a daily music session of up to 30 minutes for a maximum of 5 days. The live music intervention group is visited by professional musicians once a day for 15 minutes and will be asked to interact. The recorded music active control intervention group receives 15 minutes of preselected music over headphones. The do-nothing group receives typical postsurgical care that does not include music. Results: At study completion, we will have an empirical indication of whether live music or recorded music has a significant impact on postoperative perceived pain. We hypothesize that the live music intervention will have more impact than recorded music but that both will reduce the perceived pain more than care-as-usual. We will moreover have the preliminary evidence of the physiological underpinnings responsible for reducing the perceived pain during a music intervention, from which hypotheses for future research may be derived. Conclusions: Live music can provide relief from pain experienced by patients recovering from surgery; however, it is not known to what degree live music improves the patients' pain experience than the logistically simpler alternative of recorded music. Upon completion, this study will be able to statistically compare live versus recorded music. This study will moreover be able to provide insight into the neurophysiological mechanisms involved in reduced pain perception as a result of postoperative music listening. Trial registration: The Netherlands Central Commission on Human Research NL76900.042.21; https://www.toetsingonline.nl/to/ccmo_search.nsf/fABRpop?readform&unids=F2CA4A88E6040A45C1258791001AEA44. International registered report identifier (irrid): PRR1-10.2196/40034.
Article
Full-text available
Over the past several decades, numerous investigators have studied the syndrome of delirium. Researchers have relied on a number of different case finding methods to detect the syndrome. This paper provides an overview of instruments used in studies of delirium. We assess the validity and reliability of these instruments and compare the advantages and disadvantages of the different methods. We then present the rationale for the development of the Delirium Symptom Interview, an instrument constructed for use in the Commonwealth-Harvard Study of delirium in elderly hospitalized patients.
Article
Full-text available
Delirium, a common and often overlooked syndrome in acutely ill elderly patients, may present with signs and symptoms of depression. To determine (1) how often health care providers mistake delirium for a depressive disorder in older hospitalized patients referred to a psychiatric consultation service for depressive symptoms and (2) which signs and symptoms of depression and delirium characterize these patients. Patients older than 60 years, admitted to a Veterans Affairs teaching hospital, and consecutively referred to a psychiatric consultation service for evaluation and treatment of a depressive disorder. The diagnosis of delirium was based on two independent assessments: (1) a clinical interview by a member of the psychiatric consultation service and (2) a structured bedside evaluation performed by one of the investigators, who was not a member of the psychiatric consultation service. The investigator administered the Confusion Assessment Method Instrument, Mini-Mental State Examination, digit span forward, and months of year backward. The investigator also administered the Diagnostic Interview Schedule items for depression to elicit depressive symptoms. Twenty-eight (41.8%) of the 67 subjects referred for evaluation or treatment of a depressive disorder were found to be delirious. Compared with nondelirious subjects, the delirious subjects were older and more impaired in activities of daily living. The delirious subjects often endorsed depressive symptoms, such as low mood (60%), worthlessness (68%), and frequent thoughts of death (52%). The referring health care provider had considered delirium in the differential diagnosis of the mood disturbance in only three subjects. Health care providers should consider the diagnosis of delirium in hospitalized elderly patients who appear to be depressed.
Article
Full-text available
To determine the sensitivity of an emergency physician's conventional evaluation compared with the validated Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) regarding the recognition of acute confusional states (delirium) in elderly Emergency Department (ED) patients, a cohort of 385 patients presenting to an urban teaching hospital ED was systematically assembled. Patients had to be conscious, able to speak and older than 64 years of age. After the ED physician had examined the patient and test results had been obtained, a series of geriatric assessment results, including one for the likely presence of delirium, was made available to the ED physician; however, no result was specifically highlighted. All patients were assessed by an attending ED physician in the customary fashion. In addition, a study nurse interviewed patients using the CAM and followed patient outcomes for three months. The ED record for all patients with delirium or "probable" delirium, as determined by the CAM, were reviewed for physician diagnosis and disposition to determine how often delirium had been recognized by the emergency physician. Thirty-eight of the 385 patients screened (10%) met criteria for delirium or "probable" delirium; ED charts were complete for 35 of these, which constituted the study sample. The ED diagnosis included delirium or an acceptable synonym in 6 (17%) of these patients. In the 21 patients (62%) admitted to the hospital, the most common ED diagnosis was infection "rule out sepsis" (n = 7). Six of 13 patients discharged (46%) were diagnosed as "status post fall" without evidence of significant injury.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
Article
Full-text available
Formal assessment of cognitive decline with cognitive tests can be difficult, requiring either two measurement points or a comparison of ‘hold’ with ‘don't hold’ tests. Informant-based assessment provides an alternative approach because informants can adopt a longitudinal perspective and directly rate cognitive change. A study was carried out to assess the validity of informant ratings collected by means of the Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE). A community sample of 500 subjects aged 74 or over underwent four cognitive tests on two occasions 3½ years apart. On the second occasion, informants filled out the IQCODE. Subjects rated as having moderate or severe decline were found to have greater change on the cognitive tests. These findings support the validity of informant ratings of cognitive decline.
Article
Characteristics of instruments developed by nurses for use in evaluating delirium/acute confusional states include relative emphasis on observable behavior and the need to impose low respondent burden. Two instruments that have been most used by nurse researchers are described: The Confusion Rating Scale and the NEECHAM Confusion Scale. The former is based on observable behavior; the latter incorporates vital function and oxygen saturation measurements that may serve as early warning signs of impending delirium.
Article
The prevalence, risk factors, and outcomes of delirium were studied in 229 elderly patients. Fifty patients (22%) met criteria for delirium; nondelirious elderly constituted the control group. Abnormal sodium levels, illness severity, dementia, fever or hypothermia, psychoactive drug use, and azotemia were associated with risk of delirium. Patients with three or more risk factors had a 60% rate of delirium. Delirious patients stayed 12.1 days in the hospital vs 7.2 days for controls and were more likely to die (8% vs 1%) or be institutionalized (16% vs 3%). Illness severity predicted 6-month mortality, but the effect of delirium was not significant. Delirium occurs commonly in hospitalized elderly, is associated with chronic and acute problems, and identifies elderly at risk for death, longer hospitalization, and institutionalization. The increased mortality associated with delirium appears to be explained by greater severity of illness.
Article
This document reviews existing instruments for evaluation of delirium. Instruments have been grouped into four categories: tests that screen for cognitive impairment, delirium diagnostic instruments, delirium-specific numerical rating scales, and laboratory and paraclinical exams. Analysis of instruments was based on comparison of their psychometric properties as well as subjective judgment. Guidelines are suggested for choosing the appropriate instrument according to the type of clinical evaluation or delirium research envisaged. Important factors in choosing an instrument, besides the appropriateness of its psychometric characteristics, include administration time constraints, level of rater expertise, and patient capabilities. By familiarizing investigators with the variety of evaluation instruments available, this work should permit more appropriate instrument selection in future studies on delirium.
Article
Delirium occurs commonly among older hospitalized patients and is frequently not recognized. In an effort to identify tools useful to clinicians in the diagnosis of delirium, test characteristics of four screening instruments were compared. Patients 65 years of age or older who were admitted to one of four medical and surgical wards of a university teaching hospital were followed up prospectively. Potential subjects were excluded if unavailable for interviews or discharged within 48 hours of admission, or if judged too impaired to participate in the daily interviews. Research assistants administered four instruments used to detect delirium: Digit Span Test, Vigilance 'A' Test, Clinical Assessment of Confusion, and Confusion Assessment Method. Abnormal scores on these tests or suspicion of acute confusion prompted a referral to the clinician-investigators who then assessed the patient daily for delirium based on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Revised Third Edition criteria. Delirium occurred in 64 (14.8%) of 432 subjects. The positive likelihood ratios for all of the instruments were significantly more than 1. The instruments remained useful when applied to selected subgroups: subjects in whom acute mental status changes were documented, subjects on surgical services, and subjects with impaired cognitive status on admission. Combinations of any two instruments did not perform substantially better than the instrument with the best test characteristics: the Clinical Assessment of Confusion. All instruments were more useful at confirming delirium than in excluding it. The four instruments studied, which are suitable for use at the bedside, can aid the clinician in identifying patients likely to be suffering from delirium.
Article
Delirium, with occurrence rates from 14% to 56%, associated mortality rates from 10% to 65%, and excess annual health care expenditures from $1 to $2 billion, poses a common and serious problem for hospitalized elderly patients. Delirium is often unrecognized or misdiagnosed by physicians caring for elderly patients. Cognitive testing is rarely done as part of the admission evaluation of elderly hospitalized patients. Specific diagnosis has been difficult, since diagnostic criteria and instruments are still being developed. The etiology of delirium is complex and multifactorial, and both predisposing (host vulnerability) and precipitating factors must be considered. The recommended approach to the evaluation of delirium is empiric, in the absence of objective efficacy data. The cornerstone of evaluation includes a careful history, physical examination, and review of the medication list--since medications are the most common reversible cause of delirium. Research is needed to establish a cost-effective approach and to clarify the role of further testing, such as cerebrospinal fluid examination, brain imaging, and electroencephalography. This article is intended to heighten the awareness of clinicians as well as to stimulate research to address this important, neglected problem for elderly hospitalized patients.