Sarinnapha M Vasunilashorn1,2,3, Jamey Guess1, Long Ngo1,2, Donna Fick3,4, Richard N Jones3,5, Eva M Schmitt3, Cyrus M Kosar6, Jane S Saczynski3,7, Thomas G Travison8,2,3, Sharon K Inouye8,2,3, Edward R Marcantonio1,8,2,3. 1. Division of General Medicine and Primary Care, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts. 2. Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. 3. Aging Brain Center, Institute for Aging Research, Hebrew SeniorLife, Boston, Massachusetts. 4. Department of Psychiatry, College of Nursing and College of Medicine, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania. 5. Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, Warren Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island. 6. Department of Health Services, Policy, and Practice, School of Public Health, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island. 7. Department of Pharmacy and Health Systems Sciences, Northeastern University, Boston, Massachusetts. 8. Division of Gerontology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To derive and validate a method for scoring delirium severity using a recently validated, brief, structured diagnostic interview for Confusion Assessment Method (CAM)-defined delirium (3D-CAM) and to demonstrate its agreement with the CAM Severity short form (CAM-S SF) as the reference standard. DESIGN: Derivation and validation analysis in a prospective cohort study. SETTING: Two academic medical centers. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals aged 70 and older enrolled in the Successful Aging after Elective Surgery Study undergoing major elective noncardiac surgery (N = 566). MEASUREMENTS: The sample was randomly divided into a derivation dataset (n = 377) and an independent validation dataset (n = 189). These datasets were used to develop a severity scoring method using the 3D-CAM based on the four-item CAM-S SF (3D-CAM-S) and evaluate agreement between the 3D-CAM-S and the traditional CAM-S SF using weighted kappa statistics. RESULTS: A method for scoring severity using 3D-CAM items was developed that achieved good agreement with the CAM-S SF in the derivation dataset (κ = 0.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.93-0.95). The 3D-CAM-S achieved nearly identical agreement in the independent validation dataset (κ = 0.93, 95% CI = 0.92-0.95), and 100% of 3D-CAM-S scores were within 1 point of the CAM-S SF score in both datasets. The 3D-CAM-S also strongly predicts clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: A newly developed method for scoring delirium severity using the 3D-CAM (the 3D-CAM-S) has excellent agreement with the CAM-S SF. This new methodology enables clinicians and researchers using the 3D-CAM for surveillance to measure delirium severity and monitor its course simultaneously by tracking changes over time. The 3D-CAM-S expands the utility of the 3D-CAM as an important tool for delirium recognition and management.
OBJECTIVES: To derive and validate a method for scoring delirium severity using a recently validated, brief, structured diagnostic interview for Confusion Assessment Method (CAM)-defined delirium (3D-CAM) and to demonstrate its agreement with the CAM Severity short form (CAM-S SF) as the reference standard. DESIGN: Derivation and validation analysis in a prospective cohort study. SETTING: Two academic medical centers. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals aged 70 and older enrolled in the Successful Aging after Elective Surgery Study undergoing major elective noncardiac surgery (N = 566). MEASUREMENTS: The sample was randomly divided into a derivation dataset (n = 377) and an independent validation dataset (n = 189). These datasets were used to develop a severity scoring method using the 3D-CAM based on the four-item CAM-S SF (3D-CAM-S) and evaluate agreement between the 3D-CAM-S and the traditional CAM-S SF using weighted kappa statistics. RESULTS: A method for scoring severity using 3D-CAM items was developed that achieved good agreement with the CAM-S SF in the derivation dataset (κ = 0.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.93-0.95). The 3D-CAM-S achieved nearly identical agreement in the independent validation dataset (κ = 0.93, 95% CI = 0.92-0.95), and 100% of 3D-CAM-S scores were within 1 point of the CAM-S SF score in both datasets. The 3D-CAM-S also strongly predicts clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: A newly developed method for scoring delirium severity using the 3D-CAM (the 3D-CAM-S) has excellent agreement with the CAM-S SF. This new methodology enables clinicians and researchers using the 3D-CAM for surveillance to measure delirium severity and monitor its course simultaneously by tracking changes over time. The 3D-CAM-S expands the utility of the 3D-CAM as an important tool for delirium recognition and management.
Authors: M S Albert; S E Levkoff; C Reilly; B Liptzin; D Pilgrim; P D Cleary; D Evans; J W Rowe Journal: J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol Date: 1992 Jan-Mar Impact factor: 2.680
Authors: Eva M Schmitt; Edward R Marcantonio; David C Alsop; Richard N Jones; Selwyn O Rogers; Tamara G Fong; Eran Metzger; Sharon K Inouye Journal: J Am Med Dir Assoc Date: 2012-09-19 Impact factor: 4.669
Authors: Eva M Schmitt; Jane S Saczynski; Cyrus M Kosar; Edward R Marcantonio; Thomas Travison; Sharon K Inouye; Richard N Jones; David C Alsop; Tamara G Fong; Eran Metzger; Zara Cooper Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2015-12-14 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Frances M Yang; Richard N Jones; Sharon K Inouye; Douglas Tommet; Paul K Crane; James L Rudolph; Long H Ngo; Edward R Marcantonio Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2013-01-22 Impact factor: 4.615
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: Keith W VanDusen; Sarada Eleswarpu; Eugene W Moretti; Michael J Devinney; Donna M Crabtree; Daniel T Laskowitz; Marty G Woldorff; Kenneth C Roberts; John Whittle; Jeffrey N Browndyke; Mary Cooter; Frank W Rockhold; Oke Anakwenze; Michael P Bolognesi; Mark E Easley; Michael N Ferrandino; William A Jiranek; Miles Berger Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2020 Impact factor: 4.472
Authors: Sarinnapha M Vasunilashorn; Michael J Devinney; Leah Acker; Yoojin Jung; Long Ngo; Mary Cooter; Richard Huang; Edward R Marcantonio; Miles Berger Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2020-06-01 Impact factor: 7.538
Authors: Antara Banerji; Jamie W Sleigh; Logan J Voss; Paul S Garcia; Amy L Gaskell Journal: Front Aging Neurosci Date: 2022-10-04 Impact factor: 5.702
Authors: Renée El-Gabalawy; Ronak Patel; Kayla Kilborn; Caitlin Blaney; Christopher Hoban; Lawrence Ryner; Duane Funk; Regina Legaspi; Joseph A Fisher; James Duffin; David J Mikulis; W Alan C Mutch Journal: Front Aging Neurosci Date: 2017-08-18 Impact factor: 5.750