4.6 Review

Detecting Delirium: A Systematic Review of Identification Instruments for Non-ICU Settings

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN GERIATRICS SOCIETY
卷 69, 期 2, 页码 547-555

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jgs.16879

关键词

delirium; measurement; systematic review; psychometrics

资金

  1. National Institute on Aging [R01AG044518, R24AG054259, P01AG031720]
  2. Training Program at the University of Massachusetts Medical School [T32GM107000]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study systematically reviewed various delirium identification instruments and identified four commonly used and well-validated tools for clinical and research purposes. Future research should focus on harmonizing these measures for comparison and integration of delirium studies.
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES Delirium manifests clinically in varying ways across settings. More than 40 instruments currently exist for characterizing the different manifestations of delirium. We evaluated all delirium identification instruments according to their psychometric properties and frequency of citation in published research. DESIGN We conducted the systematic review by searching Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Cochrane Library, Excerpta Medica Database (Embase), PsycINFO, PubMed, and Web of Science from January 1, 1974, to January 31, 2020, with the keywords delirium and instruments, along with their known synonyms. We selected only systematic reviews, meta-analyses, or narrative literature reviews including multiple delirium identification instruments. MEASUREMENTS Two reviewers assessed the eligibility of articles and extracted data on all potential delirium identification instruments. Using the original publication on each instrument, the psychometric properties were examined using the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) framework. RESULTS Of 2,542 articles identified, 75 met eligibility criteria, yielding 30 different delirium identification instruments. A count of citations was determined using Scopus for the original publication for each instrument. Each instrument underwent methodological quality review of psychometric properties using COSMIN definitions. An expert panel categorized key domains for delirium identification based on criteria from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)-III through DSM-5. Four instruments were notable for having at least two of three of the following: citation count of 200 or more, strong validation methodology in their original publication, and fulfillment of DSM-5 criteria. These were, alphabetically, Confusion Assessment Method, Delirium Observation Screening Scale, Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98, and Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale. CONCLUSION Four commonly used and well-validated instruments can be recommended for clinical and research use. An important area for future investigation is to harmonize these measures to compare and combine studies on delirium.

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

4.6
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