OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of routine use of the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU) on the diagnosis rate of delirium in elderly Emergency Department (ED) patients and the validity of the CAM-ICU in the ED setting. METHODS: This was a prospective observational study in a tertiary care academic ED. We compared the diagnosis rate of delirium before implementation of the CAM-ICU, without routine use of a screening tool, with the diagnosis rate after implementation of the CAM-ICU. All consecutive patients aged 70 years or older were enrolled. The diagnosis rate before implementation was based on chart review and after implementation on a positive CAM-ICU score. In a subsample, the presence of delirium was evaluated independently according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed., text revision (DSM-IV-TR) criteria to assess the validity of the CAM-ICU. RESULTS: The total study population included 968 patients: 490 before and 478 after implementation of the CAM-ICU. The two groups were not significantly different in patient characteristics. Before implementation of the CAM-ICU, delirium was diagnosed in 14 patients (3%) and after implementation in 48 patients (10%) (P<0.001). The sensitivity of the CAM-ICU for delirium in the ED setting was 100%, specificity was 98%, positive predictive value was 92%, and negative predictive value was 100%. CONCLUSION: The diagnosis rate of delirium after implementation of the CAM-ICU was three-fold higher than before. The CAM-ICU is a reliable screening tool in the ED, with high sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of routine use of the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU) on the diagnosis rate of delirium in elderly Emergency Department (ED) patients and the validity of the CAM-ICU in the ED setting. METHODS: This was a prospective observational study in a tertiary care academic ED. We compared the diagnosis rate of delirium before implementation of the CAM-ICU, without routine use of a screening tool, with the diagnosis rate after implementation of the CAM-ICU. All consecutive patients aged 70 years or older were enrolled. The diagnosis rate before implementation was based on chart review and after implementation on a positive CAM-ICU score. In a subsample, the presence of delirium was evaluated independently according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed., text revision (DSM-IV-TR) criteria to assess the validity of the CAM-ICU. RESULTS: The total study population included 968 patients: 490 before and 478 after implementation of the CAM-ICU. The two groups were not significantly different in patient characteristics. Before implementation of the CAM-ICU, delirium was diagnosed in 14 patients (3%) and after implementation in 48 patients (10%) (P<0.001). The sensitivity of the CAM-ICU for delirium in the ED setting was 100%, specificity was 98%, positive predictive value was 92%, and negative predictive value was 100%. CONCLUSION: The diagnosis rate of delirium after implementation of the CAM-ICU was three-fold higher than before. The CAM-ICU is a reliable screening tool in the ED, with high sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value.
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: Francisco J Martín-Sánchez; Michael Christ; Òscar Miró; W Frank Peacock; John J McMurray; Héctor Bueno; Alan S Maisel; Louise Cullen; Martin R Cowie; Salvatore Di Somma; Elke Platz; Josep Masip; Uwe Zeymer; Christiaan Vrints; Susanna Price; Christian Mueller Journal: Int J Cardiol Date: 2016-07-18 Impact factor: 4.164
Authors: Christopher R Carpenter; Nada Hammouda; Elizabeth A Linton; Michelle Doering; Ugochi K Ohuabunwa; Kelly J Ko; William W Hung; Manish N Shah; Lee A Lindquist; Kevin Biese; Daniel Wei; Libby Hoy; Lori Nerbonne; Ula Hwang; Scott M Dresden Journal: Acad Emerg Med Date: 2020-12-12 Impact factor: 5.221
Authors: Marcel Émond; David Grenier; Jacques Morin; Debra Eagles; Valérie Boucher; Natalie Le Sage; Éric Mercier; Philippe Voyer; Jacques S Lee Journal: Can Geriatr J Date: 2017-03-31
Authors: Agneta H Calf; Maaike A Pouw; Barbara C van Munster; Johannes G M Burgerhof; Sophia E de Rooij; Nynke Smidt Journal: Age Ageing Date: 2021-01-08 Impact factor: 10.668