Literature DB >> 33364733

Translation and cultural adaptation of the Greek version of the confusion assessment method diagnostic algorithm and the nursing delirium screening scale and their inter-rater reliability: A prospective cohort study.

M P Ntalouka1, M Bareka1, A G Brotis2, A Chalkias1, K Stamoulis1, A Flossos1, P Tzimas3, E Arnaoutoglou1.   

Abstract

AIM: The lack of standardized tools limits the diagnosis οf postoperative delirium (POD) in the Greek population. Our aim was the translation and the cultural adaptation of the confusion assessment method (CAM) diagnostic algorithm and the nursing delirium screening scale (nu-DESC) in the Greek surgical population, and the determination of their inter-rater reliability.
METHODS: After Ethical approval and registration as a clinical trial (NCT04154176), a prospective cohort study was conducted in the Department of Anesthesiology, University Hospital of Larissa, Greece. Patients at least 60 years old, undergoing elective non-cardiac surgery, under general anesthesia were included.
RESULTS: Data from 60 patients, 180 records in total, were analyzed. There was an "almost perfect agreement" between the raters with the use of CAM (Cohen's Kappa estimate: 0.960; 95 % CI: 0.905-1.000) and nu-DESC (Cohen's Kappa estimate: 0.981; 95 % CI: 0.944-1.000). The agreement on each specific question of CAM and nu-DESC ranged from "substantial" to "almost perfect agreement". Based on the CAM, the sensitivity and specificity of nu-DESC were 0.97 (95 % CI: 0.82-1.00) and 0.99 (95 % CI: 0.96-1.00), respectively. The Greek versions of CAM and nu-DESC showed a high inter-rater agreement.
CONCLUSION: With the translation, the cultural adaptation, and the determination of their inter-rater agreement, the CAM diagnostic algorithm and the nu-DESC may serve as reliable instruments for the detection of POD in the Greek population. HIPPOKRATIA 2020, 24(1): 8-14. Copyright 2020, Hippokratio General Hospital of Thessaloniki.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Delirium; Greece; anesthesia; confusion assessment method; diagnosis; general; humans; neuropsychological tests; nursing delirium screening scale; reproducibility of results

Year:  2020        PMID: 33364733      PMCID: PMC7733361     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hippokratia        ISSN: 1108-4189            Impact factor:   0.471


  26 in total

Review 1.  Postoperative delirium and postoperative cognitive dysfunction in the elderly - what are the differences?

Authors:  L Krenk; L S Rasmussen
Journal:  Minerva Anestesiol       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 3.051

Review 2.  Postoperative cognitive disorders: an update.

Authors:  M P Ntalouka; E Arnaoutoglou; P Tzimas
Journal:  Hippokratia       Date:  2018 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 0.471

3.  Assessment of older people: self-maintaining and instrumental activities of daily living.

Authors:  M P Lawton; E M Brody
Journal:  Gerontologist       Date:  1969

4.  Clarifying confusion: the confusion assessment method. A new method for detection of delirium.

Authors:  S K Inouye; C H van Dyck; C A Alessi; S Balkin; A P Siegal; R I Horwitz
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1990-12-15       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 5.  Postoperative delirium.

Authors:  Kimberly F Rengel; Pratik P Pandharipande; Christopher G Hughes
Journal:  Presse Med       Date:  2018-04-19       Impact factor: 1.228

Review 6.  Cognitive Reserve and the Risk of Postoperative Cognitive Dysfunction.

Authors:  Insa Feinkohl; Georg Winterer; Claudia D Spies; Tobias Pischon
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2017-02-17       Impact factor: 5.594

7.  Accuracy of the 15-item geriatric depression scale (GDS-15) in a community sample of the oldest old.

Authors:  Anton J M de Craen; T J Heeren; Jacobijn Gussekloo
Journal:  Int J Geriatr Psychiatry       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 3.485

8.  World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects.

Authors: 
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2013-11-27       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Observational studies: getting clear about transparency.

Authors: 
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2014-08-26       Impact factor: 11.069

10.  Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic.

Authors:  Mary L McHugh
Journal:  Biochem Med (Zagreb)       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 2.313

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.