• Am J Emerg Med · Jul 2018

    Observational Study

    An evaluation of single question delirium screening tools in older emergency department patients.

    • Jin H Han, Amanda Wilson, John F Schnelle, Robert S Dittus, and E W Ely.
    • Center for Quality Aging, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, United States; Department of Emergency Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, United States; Division of General Internal Medicine and Public Health, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, United States. Electronic address: Jin.h.han@vanderbilt.edu.
    • Am J Emerg Med. 2018 Jul 1; 36 (7): 1249-1252.

    ObjectivesTo determine the diagnostic performances of several single question delirium screens. To the patient we asked: "Have you had any difficulty thinking clearly lately?" To the patient's surrogate, we asked: "Is the patient at his or her baseline mental status?" and "Have you noticed the patient's mental status fluctuate throughout the course of the day?"MethodsThis was a prospective observational study that enrolled English speaking patients 65 years or older. A research assistant (RA) and emergency physician (EP) independently asked the patient and surrogate the single question delirium screens. The reference standard for delirium was a consultation-liaison psychiatrist's assessment using Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) criteria. All assessments were performed within 3 h and were all blinded to each other.ResultsOf the 406 patients enrolled, 50 (12%) were delirious. A patient who was unable to answer the question "Have you had any difficulty thinking clearly lately?" was 99.7% (95% CI: 98.0%-99.9%) specific, but only 24.0% (95% CI: 14.3%-37.4%) sensitive for delirium when asked by the RA. The baseline mental status surrogate question was 77.1% (95% CI: 61.0%-87.9%) sensitive and 87.5% (95% CI: 82.8%-91.1%) specific for delirium when asked by the RA. The fluctuating course surrogate question was 77.1% (95% CI: 61.0%-87.9%) sensitive and 80.2% (95% CI: 74.8%-84.7%) specific. When asked by the EP, the single question delirium screens' diagnostic performances were similar.ConclusionsThe patient and surrogate single question delirium assessments may be useful for delirium screening in the ED.Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…