Exploring the utility of ultra-brief delirium assessments in a nonintensive care geriatric population: the GEM study.

OBJECTIVE

To determine how an ultra-brief structured tool that would require usually less than a minute for delirium assessment compares with a clinical assessment based on Diagnostic and Statistical Manual-IV (DSM-IV) in a geriatric postacute care (PAC) rehabilitation unit.

DESIGN

Prospective observational cohort study.

SETTING

Postacute geriatric hospital ward of a Veteran's Affairs hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Consecutively admitted patients between 50 and 100 years old for inpatient postacute medical care.

MEASUREMENTS: Two teams, blinded to one another's evaluations, performed daily delirium assessments using either the Confusion Assessment Method for the intensive care unit (CAM-ICU) or clinical assessment based on DSM-IV.

RESULTS

There were 61 patients enrolled (median 73 years old, range: 52-94), who underwent 521 paired observations. Delirium was detected in 18 patients (29.5%) by one of the two screening methods over the course of the study, most of whom (14 patients, 23%) were delirious on the first day of enrollment. Delirium was identified by the CAM-ICU on 12.6% of the observations and by the clinical assessment on 6% of the observations (κ = 0.25, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.09, 0.40). Examination of disagreement between the 2 evaluations revealed that patients with dementia (κ = 0.11, 95% CI: -0.14, 0.27) had 10.7 times higher odds (95% CI: [3.1, 36.8], p value < .001) of having discordance than patients without dementia.

CONCLUSIONS

Different delirium assessments may disagree depending on the study population. Dementia patients are especially challenging to evaluate for delirium.