共 50 条
Evaluation of delirium screening tools in geriatric medical inpatients: a diagnostic test accuracy study
被引:68
作者:
Hendry, Kirsty
[1
]
Quinn, Terence J.
[2
]
Evans, Jonathan
[3
]
Scortichini, Valeria
[4
]
Miller, Hazel
[5
]
Burns, Jennifer
[5
]
Cunnington, Annelouise
[6
]
Stott, David J.
[2
]
机构:
[1] Univ Glasgow, Glasgow Royal Infirm, Inst Cardiovasc & Med Sci, Glasgow, Lanark, Scotland
[2] Univ Glasgow, Inst Cardiovasc & Med Sci, Glasgow, Lanark, Scotland
[3] Univ Glasgow, Inst Hlth & Wellbeing, Glasgow, Lanark, Scotland
[4] Univ Milan, Dept Med Sci & Community Hlth, Milan, Italy
[5] Glasgow Royal Infirm, Dept Med Elderly, Glasgow, Lanark, Scotland
[6] Greater Glasgow & Clyde NHS Geriatr, Glasgow, Lanark, Scotland
关键词:
older people;
delirium;
acute care;
cognitive impairment;
geriatrics;
dementia;
CONFUSION ASSESSMENT METHOD;
DEMENTIA;
D O I:
10.1093/ageing/afw130
中图分类号:
R592 [老年病学];
C [社会科学总论];
学科分类号:
03 ;
0303 ;
100203 ;
摘要:
Introduction: screening all unscheduled older adults for delirium is recommended in national guidelines, but there is no consensus on how to perform initial assessment. Aim: to evaluate the test accuracy of five brief cognitive assessment tools for delirium diagnosis in routine clinical practice. Methods: a consecutive cohort of non-elective, elderly care (older than 65 years) hospital inpatients admitted to a geriatric medical assessment unit of an urban teaching hospital. Reference assessments were clinical diagnosis of delirium performed by elderly care physicians. Routine screening tests were: Abbreviated Mental Test (AMT-10, AMT-4), 4 A's Test (4AT), brief Confusion Assessment Method (bCAM), months of the year backwards (MOTYB) and informant Single Question in Delirium (SQiD). Results: we assessed 500 patients, mean age 83 years (range = 66-101). Clinical diagnoses were: 93 of 500 (18.6%) definite delirium, 104 of 500 (20.8%) possible delirium and 277 of 500 (55.4%) no delirium; 266 of 500 (53.2%) were identified as definite or possible dementia. For diagnosis of definite delirium, AMT-4 (cut-point <3/4) had a sensitivity of 92.7% (95% confidence interval (CI): 84.8-97.3), with a specificity of 53.7% (95% CI: 48.1-59.2); AMT-10 (<4/10), MOTYB (<4/12) and SQiD showed similar performance. bCAM had a sensitivity of 70.3% (95% CI: 58.5-80.3) with a specificity of 91.4% (95% CI: 87.7-94.3). 4AT (>4/12) had a sensitivity of 86.7% (95% CI: 77.5-93.2) and specificity of 69.5% (95% CI: 64.4-74.3). Conclusions: short screening tools such as AMT-4 or MOTYB have good sensitivity for definite delirium, but poor specificity; these tools may be reasonable as a first stage in assessment for delirium. The 4AT is feasible and appears to perform well with good sensitivity and reasonable specificity.
引用
收藏
页码:832 / 837
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条