Jin H Han1, Amanda Wilson2, Eduard E Vasilevskis3, Ayumi Shintani4, John F Schnelle3, Robert S Dittus5, Amy J Graves4, Alan B Storrow6, John Shuster2, E Wesley Ely7. 1. Center for Quality Aging, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN; Department of Emergency Medicine, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN. Electronic address: jin.h.han@vanderbilt.edu. 2. Department of Psychiatry, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN. 3. Center for Quality Aging, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN; Department of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine and Public Health, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN; Center for Health Services Research, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN; Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Center (GRECC), Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Tennessee Valley Health Care Center, Nashville, TN. 4. Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN. 5. Department of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine and Public Health, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN; Center for Health Services Research, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN; Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Center (GRECC), Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Tennessee Valley Health Care Center, Nashville, TN. 6. Department of Emergency Medicine, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN. 7. Center for Quality Aging, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN; Center for Health Services Research, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN; Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Allergy, Pulmonary, and Critical Care Medicine, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN; Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Center (GRECC), Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Tennessee Valley Health Care Center, Nashville, TN.
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE: Delirium is a common form of acute brain dysfunction with prognostic significance. Health care professionals caring for older emergency department (ED) patients miss delirium in approximately 75% of cases. This error results from a lack of available measures that can be performed rapidly enough to be incorporated into clinical practice. Therefore, we developed and evaluated a novel 2-step approach to delirium surveillance for the ED. METHODS: This prospective observational study was conducted at an academic ED in patients aged 65 years or older. A research assistant and physician performed the Delirium Triage Screen (DTS), designed to be a highly sensitive rule-out test, and the Brief Confusion Assessment Method (bCAM), designed to be a highly specific rule-in test for delirium. The reference standard for delirium was a comprehensive psychiatrist assessment using Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision criteria. All assessments were independently conducted within 3 hours of one another. Sensitivities, specificities, and likelihood ratios with their 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated. RESULTS: Of 406 enrolled patients, 50 (12.3%) had delirium diagnosed by the psychiatrist reference standard. The DTS was 98.0% sensitive (95% CI 89.5% to 99.5%), with an expected specificity of approximately 55% for both raters. The DTS's negative likelihood ratio was 0.04 (95% CI 0.01 to 0.25) for both raters. As the complement, the bCAM had a specificity of 95.8% (95% CI 93.2% to 97.4%) and 96.9% (95% CI 94.6% to 98.3%) and a sensitivity of 84.0% (95% CI 71.5% to 91.7%) and 78.0% (95% CI 64.8% to 87.2%) when performed by the physician and research assistant, respectively. The positive likelihood ratios for the bCAM were 19.9 (95% CI 12.0 to 33.2) and 25.2 (95% CI 13.9 to 46.0), respectively. If the research assistant DTS was followed by the physician bCAM, the sensitivity of this combination was 84.0% (95% CI 71.5% to 91.7%) and specificity was 95.8% (95% CI 93.2% to 97.4%). If the research assistant performed both the DTS and bCAM, this combination was 78.0% sensitive (95% CI 64.8% to 87.2%) and 97.2% specific (95% CI 94.9% to 98.5%). If the physician performed both the DTS and bCAM, this combination was 82.0% sensitive (95% CI 69.2% to 90.2%) and 95.8% specific (95% CI 93.2% to 97.4%). CONCLUSION: In older ED patients, this 2-step approach (highly sensitive DTS followed by highly specific bCAM) may enable health care professionals, regardless of clinical background, to efficiently screen for delirium. Larger, multicenter trials are needed to confirm these findings and to determine the effect of these assessments on delirium recognition in the ED.
STUDY OBJECTIVE:Delirium is a common form of acute brain dysfunction with prognostic significance. Health care professionals caring for older emergency department (ED) patients miss delirium in approximately 75% of cases. This error results from a lack of available measures that can be performed rapidly enough to be incorporated into clinical practice. Therefore, we developed and evaluated a novel 2-step approach to delirium surveillance for the ED. METHODS: This prospective observational study was conducted at an academic ED in patients aged 65 years or older. A research assistant and physician performed the Delirium Triage Screen (DTS), designed to be a highly sensitive rule-out test, and the Brief Confusion Assessment Method (bCAM), designed to be a highly specific rule-in test for delirium. The reference standard for delirium was a comprehensive psychiatrist assessment using Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision criteria. All assessments were independently conducted within 3 hours of one another. Sensitivities, specificities, and likelihood ratios with their 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated. RESULTS: Of 406 enrolled patients, 50 (12.3%) had delirium diagnosed by the psychiatrist reference standard. The DTS was 98.0% sensitive (95% CI 89.5% to 99.5%), with an expected specificity of approximately 55% for both raters. The DTS's negative likelihood ratio was 0.04 (95% CI 0.01 to 0.25) for both raters. As the complement, the bCAM had a specificity of 95.8% (95% CI 93.2% to 97.4%) and 96.9% (95% CI 94.6% to 98.3%) and a sensitivity of 84.0% (95% CI 71.5% to 91.7%) and 78.0% (95% CI 64.8% to 87.2%) when performed by the physician and research assistant, respectively. The positive likelihood ratios for the bCAM were 19.9 (95% CI 12.0 to 33.2) and 25.2 (95% CI 13.9 to 46.0), respectively. If the research assistant DTS was followed by the physician bCAM, the sensitivity of this combination was 84.0% (95% CI 71.5% to 91.7%) and specificity was 95.8% (95% CI 93.2% to 97.4%). If the research assistant performed both the DTS and bCAM, this combination was 78.0% sensitive (95% CI 64.8% to 87.2%) and 97.2% specific (95% CI 94.9% to 98.5%). If the physician performed both the DTS and bCAM, this combination was 82.0% sensitive (95% CI 69.2% to 90.2%) and 95.8% specific (95% CI 93.2% to 97.4%). CONCLUSION: In older ED patients, this 2-step approach (highly sensitive DTS followed by highly specific bCAM) may enable health care professionals, regardless of clinical background, to efficiently screen for delirium. Larger, multicenter trials are needed to confirm these findings and to determine the effect of these assessments on delirium recognition in the ED.
Authors: Jin H Han; Ayumi Shintani; Svetlana Eden; Alessandro Morandi; Laurence M Solberg; John Schnelle; Robert S Dittus; Alan B Storrow; E Wesley Ely Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2010-04-03 Impact factor: 5.721
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: Jin H Han; Svetlana Eden; Ayumi Shintani; Alessandro Morandi; John Schnelle; Robert S Dittus; Alan B Storrow; E Wesley Ely Journal: Acad Emerg Med Date: 2011-04-26 Impact factor: 3.451
Authors: E Card; P Pandharipande; C Tomes; C Lee; J Wood; D Nelson; A Graves; A Shintani; E W Ely; C Hughes Journal: Br J Anaesth Date: 2014-12-23 Impact factor: 9.166
Authors: Jin H Han; Christina J Hayhurst; Rameela Chandrasekhar; Christopher G Hughes; Eduard E Vasilevskis; Jo Ellen Wilson; John F Schnelle; Robert S Dittus; E Wesley Ely Journal: Psychosomatics Date: 2018-05-17 Impact factor: 2.386
Authors: Jo Ellen Wilson; Leanne Boehm; Lauren R Samuels; Deborah Unger; Martha Leonard; Christianne Roumie; E Wesley Ely; Robert S Dittus; Sumi Misra; Jin H Han Journal: Palliat Support Care Date: 2019-10
Authors: Jin H Han; Amanda Wilson; Amy J Graves; Ayumi Shintani; John F Schnelle; Robert S Dittus; James S Powers; John Vernon; Alan B Storrow; E Wesley Ely Journal: Acad Emerg Med Date: 2014-02 Impact factor: 3.451
Authors: Susan P Bell; Eduard E Vasilevskis; Avantika A Saraf; J M L Jacobsen; Sunil Kripalani; Amanda S Mixon; John F Schnelle; Sandra F Simmons Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2016-04-05 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Claire M Motyl; Long Ngo; Wenxiao Zhou; Yoojin Jung; Douglas Leslie; Marie Boltz; Erica Husser; Sharon K Inouye; Donna Fick; Edward R Marcantonio Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2020-09-15 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Jin H Han; Nathan E Brummel; Rameela Chandrasekhar; Jo Ellen Wilson; Xulei Liu; Eduard E Vasilevskis; Timothy D Girard; Maria E Carlo; Robert S Dittus; John F Schnelle; E Wesley Ely Journal: Am J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2016-07-04 Impact factor: 4.105