4.5 Article

Validating the 4A's test in screening for delirium in a culturally diverse geriatric inpatient population

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GERIATRIC PSYCHIATRY
卷 32, 期 12, 页码 1322-1329

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/gps.4615

关键词

delirium screening; geriatrics; validation; diagnostic accuracy; dementia; non-English speaking

向作者/读者索取更多资源

ObjectiveTo measure the diagnostic accuracy of the 4A's test in screening for delirium in geriatric inpatients from culturally diverse backgrounds. MethodsA prospective study was conducted with patients admitted to the geriatric and orthogeriatric services of a tertiary teaching hospital. Consenting participants aged 65years and over were screened for delirium with the 4AT by nursing staff within 72h of admission. The diagnosis of delirium was made separately by expert assessors, responsible for the participant's clinical care, blinded to the 4AT score, within 30min of the 4AT assessment using the DSM 5 criteria and the Confusion Assessment Method. Interpreters were used for non-English speaking patients. The Informant Questionnaire for Cognitive Decline in the Elderly was completed by a carer/relative to assess for probable dementia. ResultsA total of 257 participants (mean age 85) were recruited over five months. Delirium was diagnosed in 159 (62%) by the expert assessors and 158 (62%) by the 4AT assessment. A total of 205 participants (80% of total population) had probable dementia. The sensitivity and specificity of the 4AT were 87% and 80%, respectively, in detecting delirium overall, 86% and 71% in people with probable dementia and 91% and 71% for non-English speaking participants. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for delirium in the whole population was 0.92, 0.89 in the probable dementia subgroup and 0.90 in non-English speaking participants. ConclusionsThe 4AT is a sensitive and specific screening tool for delirium in geriatric inpatients, including those with probable dementia or who are non-English speaking. Copyright (c) 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据