Israel journal of health policy research · 2024
Delirium screening in the emergency department: evaluation and intervention.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Meged-Book Tehilah, Frenkel Reut, Nikonov Anna, Zeldetz Vladimir, Kosto Amit, Schwarzfuchs Dan, Freud Tamar, Press Yan
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Between 8-17% of older adults, and up to 40% of those arriving from nursing homes, present with delirium upon admission to the Emergency Department (ED). However, this condition often remains undiagnosed by ED medical staff. We investigated the prevalence of delirium among patients aged 65 and older admitted to the ED and assessed the impact of a prospective study aimed at increasing awareness.
METHODS: The study was structured into four phases: a "pre-intervention period" (T0); an "awareness period" (T1), during which information about delirium and its diagnosis was disseminated to ED staff; a "screening period" (T2), in which dedicated evaluators screened ED patients aged 65 and older; and a "post-intervention period" (T3), following the departure of the evaluators. Delirium screening was conducted using the Brief Confusion Assessment Method (bCAM) questionnaire.
RESULTS: During the T0 and T1 periods, the rate of delirium diagnosed by ED staff was below 1%. The evaluators identified a delirium rate of 14.9% among the screened older adults during the T2 period, whereas the rate among those assessed by ED staff was between 1.6% and 1.9%. Following the evaluators' departure in the T3 period, the rate of delirium diagnosis decreased to 0.89%.
CONCLUSIONS: This study underscores that a significant majority of older adult delirium cases remain undetected by ED staff. Despite efforts to increase awareness, the rate of diagnosis did not significantly improve. While the presence of dedicated delirium evaluators slightly increased the diagnosis rate among patients assessed by ED staff, this rate reverted to pre-intervention levels after the evaluators left. These findings emphasize the necessity of implementing mandatory delirium screening during ED triage and throughout the patient's stay.
METHODS: The study was structured into four phases: a "pre-intervention period" (T0); an "awareness period" (T1), during which information about delirium and its diagnosis was disseminated to ED staff; a "screening period" (T2), in which dedicated evaluators screened ED patients aged 65 and older; and a "post-intervention period" (T3), following the departure of the evaluators. Delirium screening was conducted using the Brief Confusion Assessment Method (bCAM) questionnaire.
RESULTS: During the T0 and T1 periods, the rate of delirium diagnosed by ED staff was below 1%. The evaluators identified a delirium rate of 14.9% among the screened older adults during the T2 period, whereas the rate among those assessed by ED staff was between 1.6% and 1.9%. Following the evaluators' departure in the T3 period, the rate of delirium diagnosis decreased to 0.89%.
CONCLUSIONS: This study underscores that a significant majority of older adult delirium cases remain undetected by ED staff. Despite efforts to increase awareness, the rate of diagnosis did not significantly improve. While the presence of dedicated delirium evaluators slightly increased the diagnosis rate among patients assessed by ED staff, this rate reverted to pre-intervention levels after the evaluators left. These findings emphasize the necessity of implementing mandatory delirium screening during ED triage and throughout the patient's stay.