Hui-Shan Lin1,2, Eamonn Eeles1,2, Shaun Pandy1,2, Donna Pinsker3,4, Cecily Brasch3, Stephanie Yerkovich2,5. 1. Department of Geriatric Medicine, The Prince Charles Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. 2. School of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. 3. Department of Clinical Psychology and Neuropsychology, The Prince Charles Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. 4. School of Psychology, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. 5. Department of Thoracic Medicine, The Prince Charles Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Abstract
AIM: Delirium is poorly recognised and inadequately treated in medical settings. This research aimed to determine the psychometric properties of a newly developed tool, SQeeC against another emergent instrument, SQiD, in the screening of delirium. METHODS: The SQeeC was administered to 100 patients and SQiD administered to their informants in the general medical wards of a General Hospital. Data were compared with the reference standard geriatric consultant assessment of delirium. RESULTS: Compared with the reference standard, the SQeeC was found to have a sensitivity of 83% (95% CI 52-98%) and a specificity of 81% (95% CI 72-89%) with a negative predictive value of 97% (95% CI 90-100%) while the SQiD was found to have a sensitivity of 77% (95% CI 56-91%), a specificity of 51% (95% CI 37-64%) and a negative predictive value of 83% (95% CI 66-93%). CONCLUSION: The SQeeC and SQiD are simple and time efficient screening tools with encouraging psychometric properties.
AIM: Delirium is poorly recognised and inadequately treated in medical settings. This research aimed to determine the psychometric properties of a newly developed tool, SQeeC against another emergent instrument, SQiD, in the screening of delirium. METHODS: The SQeeC was administered to 100 patients and SQiD administered to their informants in the general medical wards of a General Hospital. Data were compared with the reference standard geriatric consultant assessment of delirium. RESULTS: Compared with the reference standard, the SQeeC was found to have a sensitivity of 83% (95% CI 52-98%) and a specificity of 81% (95% CI 72-89%) with a negative predictive value of 97% (95% CI 90-100%) while the SQiD was found to have a sensitivity of 77% (95% CI 56-91%), a specificity of 51% (95% CI 37-64%) and a negative predictive value of 83% (95% CI 66-93%). CONCLUSION: The SQeeC and SQiD are simple and time efficient screening tools with encouraging psychometric properties.
Authors: Jo Ellen Wilson; Matthew F Mart; Colm Cunningham; Yahya Shehabi; Timothy D Girard; Alasdair M J MacLullich; Arjen J C Slooter; E Wesley Ely Journal: Nat Rev Dis Primers Date: 2020-11-12 Impact factor: 65.038
Authors: Susan D Shenkin; Christopher Fox; Mary Godfrey; Najma Siddiqi; Steve Goodacre; John Young; Atul Anand; Alasdair Gray; Janet Hanley; Allan MacRaild; Jill Steven; Polly L Black; Zoë Tieges; Julia Boyd; Jacqueline Stephen; Christopher J Weir; Alasdair M J MacLullich Journal: BMC Med Date: 2019-07-24 Impact factor: 8.775
Authors: Simone Brefka; Gerhard Wilhelm Eschweiler; Dhayana Dallmeier; Michael Denkinger; Christoph Leinert Journal: Z Gerontol Geriatr Date: 2022-01-14 Impact factor: 1.292