OBJECTIVES: To identify valid tools to diagnose delirium superimposed on dementia. DESIGN: Systematic review of studies of delirium tools that explicitly included individuals with dementia. SETTING: Hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Studies were included if delirium assessment tools were validated against standard criteria, and the presence of dementia was assessed according to standard criteria that used validated instruments. MEASUREMENTS: PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases were searched for articles in English published between January 1960 and January 2012. RESULTS: Nine studies fulfilled the selection criteria. Of 1,569 participants, 401 had dementia, and 50 had delirium superimposed on dementia. Six delirium tools were evaluated. One study using the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) with 85% of participants with dementia had high specificity (96-100%) and moderate sensitivity (77%). Two intensive care unit studies that used the CAM for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU) reported 100% sensitivity and specificity for delirium in 23 individuals with dementia. One study using electroencephalography reported sensitivity of 67% and specificity of 91% in a population with a 100% prevalence of dementia. No studies examined potential effects of dementia severity or subtype on diagnostic accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence base on tools for detection of delirium superimposed on dementia is limited, although some existing tools show promise. Further studies of existing or refined tools with larger samples and more-detailed characterization of dementia are required to address the identification of delirium superimposed on dementia.
OBJECTIVES: To identify valid tools to diagnose delirium superimposed on dementia. DESIGN: Systematic review of studies of delirium tools that explicitly included individuals with dementia. SETTING: Hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Studies were included if delirium assessment tools were validated against standard criteria, and the presence of dementia was assessed according to standard criteria that used validated instruments. MEASUREMENTS: PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases were searched for articles in English published between January 1960 and January 2012. RESULTS: Nine studies fulfilled the selection criteria. Of 1,569 participants, 401 had dementia, and 50 had delirium superimposed on dementia. Six delirium tools were evaluated. One study using the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM) with 85% of participants with dementia had high specificity (96-100%) and moderate sensitivity (77%). Two intensive care unit studies that used the CAM for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU) reported 100% sensitivity and specificity for delirium in 23 individuals with dementia. One study using electroencephalography reported sensitivity of 67% and specificity of 91% in a population with a 100% prevalence of dementia. No studies examined potential effects of dementia severity or subtype on diagnostic accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence base on tools for detection of delirium superimposed on dementia is limited, although some existing tools show promise. Further studies of existing or refined tools with larger samples and more-detailed characterization of dementia are required to address the identification of delirium superimposed on dementia.
Authors: Adela Mitasova; Milena Kostalova; Josef Bednarik; Radka Michalcakova; Tomas Kasparek; Petra Balabanova; Ladislav Dusek; Stanislav Vohanka; E Wesley Ely Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: E W Ely; S K Inouye; G R Bernard; S Gordon; J Francis; L May; B Truman; T Speroff; S Gautam; R Margolin; R P Hart; R Dittus Journal: JAMA Date: 2001-12-05 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: David J Meagher; Maeve Leonard; Sinead Donnelly; Marion Conroy; Jean Saunders; Paula T Trzepacz Journal: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry Date: 2010-06-28 Impact factor: 10.154
Authors: Jennifer G Chester; Laura J Grande; William P Milberg; Regina E McGlinchey; Lewis A Lipsitz; James L Rudolph Journal: Am J Med Date: 2011-05-17 Impact factor: 4.965
Authors: Joost Witlox; Lisa S M Eurelings; Jos F M de Jonghe; Kees J Kalisvaart; Piet Eikelenboom; Willem A van Gool Journal: JAMA Date: 2010-07-28 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Alessandro Morandi; Laurence M Solberg; Ralf Habermann; Patrick Cleeton; Emily Peterson; E Wesley Ely; John Schnelle Journal: J Am Med Dir Assoc Date: 2009-06 Impact factor: 4.669
Authors: Patrick M Bossuyt; Johannes B Reitsma; David E Bruns; Constantine A Gatsonis; Paul P Glasziou; Les M Irwig; Jeroen G Lijmer; David Moher; Drummond Rennie; Henrica C W de Vet Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2003-01-07 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Heidi L Wald; Luci K Leykum; Melissa L P Mattison; Eduard E Vasilevskis; David O Meltzer Journal: J Hosp Med Date: 2015-04-16 Impact factor: 2.960
Authors: Richard N Jones; Sevdenur Cizginer; Laura Pavlech; Asha Albuquerque; Lori A Daiello; Kumar Dharmarajan; Lauren J Gleason; Benjamin Helfand; Lauren Massimo; Esther Oh; Olivia I Okereke; Patricia Tabloski; Laura A Rabin; Jirong Yue; Edward R Marcantonio; Tamara G Fong; Tammy T Hshieh; Eran D Metzger; Kristen Erickson; Eva M Schmitt; Sharon K Inouye Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2019-02-01 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Eric Yang; Matthias Kreuzer; September Hesse; Paran Davari; Simon C Lee; Paul S García Journal: J Clin Monit Comput Date: 2017-03-08 Impact factor: 2.502
Authors: Wolfgang Hasemann; Florian F Grossmann; Rahel Stadler; Roland Bingisser; Dieter Breil; Martina Hafner; Reto W Kressig; Christian H Nickel Journal: Intern Emerg Med Date: 2017-12-30 Impact factor: 3.397
Authors: Erika Steensma; Wenxiao Zhou; Long Ngo; Jacqueline Gallagher; Sharon Inouye; Douglas Leslie; Marie Boltz; Ann Kolanowski; Lorraine Mion; Edward R Marcantonio; Donna Fick Journal: J Am Med Dir Assoc Date: 2019-07-03 Impact factor: 4.669