Trends in delirium coding rates in older hospital inpatients in England and Scotland: full population data comprising 7.7M patients per year show substantial increases between 2012 and 2020

Background: Little information is available on change in delirium coding rates over time in major healthcare systems. We examined trends in delirium discharge coding rates in older patients in hospital admissions to the National Health Service (NHS) in England and Scotland between 2012 and 2020. / Methods: Hospital administrative coding data were sourced from NHS Digital England and Public Health Scotland. We examined rates of delirium (F05 from ICD-10) in patients aged ≥70 years in 5 year and ≥90 age bands. / Results: There were approximately 7,000,000 discharges/year in England and 700,000/year in Scotland. Substantially increased delirium coding was observed for all age bands between 2012/2013 and 2019/2020 (p<0.001, Mann Kendall’s tau). In the ≥90 age band, there was a 4-fold increase between 2012 and 2020. / Conclusion: Delirium coding rates have shown large increases in the NHS in England and Scotland, likely reflecting several factors including policy initiatives, detection tool implementation and education

Delirium is under-reported in discharge summaries and in hospital administrative systems: a systematic review

Background Accurate recording of delirium in discharge summaries (DS) and hospital administrative systems (HAS) is critical for patient care. Objective To systematically review studies reporting the frequency of delirium documentation and coding in DS and HAS, respectively. Method We searched Medline, Embase, PsycINFO and Web of Science databases from inception to 23 June 2021. Eligibility criteria included requiring the term delirium in DS or HAS. Screening and full-text reviews were performed independently by two reviewers. Risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using the Effective Public Health Practice Project tool. Results The search yielded 7,910 results; 24 studies were included. The studies were heterogeneous in design and size (N=25 to 809,512). Mean age ranged from 57 to 84 years. Four studies reported only overall DS documentation and HAS coding in whole hospital or healthcare databases. Twenty studies used additional delirium ascertainment methods (e.g. chart review) in smaller patient subsets. Studies reported either DS figures only (N=8), HAS figures only (N=11), or both (N=5). Documentation rates in DS ranged from 0.1% to 64%. Coding rates in HAS ranged from 1.5% to 49%. Some studies explored the impact of race, and nurse versus physician practice. No significant differences were reported for race; one study reported that nurses showed higher documentation rates in DS relative to physicians. Most studies (N=22) had medium to high RoB. Conclusion Delirium is a common and serious medical emergency, yet studies show considerable under-documentation and under-coding in healthcare systems. This has important implications for patient care and service planning. Healthcare systems need to take action to reach satisfactory delirium documentation and coding rates

Cerebrospinal fluid cortisol levels are higher in patients with delirium versus controls

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>High plasma cortisol levels can cause acute cognitive and neuropsychiatric dysfunction, and have been linked with delirium. CSF cortisol levels more closely reflect brain exposure to cortisol, but there are no studies of CSF cortisol levels in delirium. In this pilot study we acquired CSF specimens at the onset of spinal anaesthesia in patients undergoing hip fracture surgery, and compared CSF and plasma cortisol levels in delirium cases versus controls.</p> <p>Findings</p> <p>Delirium assessments were performed the evening before or on the morning of operation with a standard battery comprising cognitive tests, mental status assessments and the Confusion Assessment Method. CSF and plasma samples were obtained at the onset of the operation and cortisol levels measured. Twenty patients (15 female, 5 male) aged 62 - 93 years were studied. Seven patients were diagnosed with delirium. The mean ages of cases (81.4 (SD 7.2)) and controls (80.5 (SD 8.7)) were not significantly different (p = 0.88). The median (interquartile range) CSF cortisol levels were significantly higher in cases (63.9 (40.4-102.1) nmol/L) than controls (31.4 (21.7-43.3) nmol/L; Mann-Whitney U, p = 0.029). The median (interquartile range) of plasma cortisol was also significantly higher in cases (968.8 (886.2-1394.4) nmol/L, than controls (809.4 (544.0-986.4) nmol/L; Mann Whitney U, p = 0.036).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>These findings support an association between higher CSF cortisol levels and delirium. This extends previous findings linking higher plasma cortisol and delirium, and suggests that more definitive studies of the relationship between cortisol levels and delirium are now required.</p

Delirium detection tools show varying completion rates and positive score rates when used at scale in routine practice in general hospital settings: A systematic review

Background: Multiple short delirium detection tools have been validated in research studies and implemented in routine care, but there has been little study of these tools in real-world conditions. This systematic review synthesized literature reporting completion rates and/or delirium positive score rates of detection tools in large clinical populations in general hospital settings. // Methods: PROSPERO (CRD42022385166). Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and gray literature were searched from 1980 to December 31, 2022. Included studies or audit reports used a validated delirium detection tool performed directly with the patient as part of routine care in large clinical populations (n ≥ 1000) within a general acute hospital setting. Narrative synthesis was performed. // Results: Twenty-two research studies and four audit reports were included. Tools used alone or in combination were the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM), 4 ‘A's Test (4AT), Delirium Observation Screening Scale (DOSS), Brief CAM (bCAM), Nursing Delirium Screening Scale (NuDESC), and Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist (ICDSC). Populations and settings varied and tools were used at different stages and frequencies in the patient journey, including on admission only; inpatient, daily or more frequently; on admission and as inpatient; inpatient post-operatively. Tool completion rates ranged from 19% to 100%. Admission positive score rates ranged from: CAM 8%–51%; 4AT 13%–20%. Inpatient positive score rates ranged from: CAM 2%–20%, DOSS 6%–42%, and NuDESC 5–13%. Postoperative positive score rates were 21% and 28% (4AT). All but two studies had moderate–high risk of bias. // Conclusions: This systematic review of delirium detection tool implementation in large acute patient populations found clinically important variability in tool completion rates, and in delirium positive score rates relative to expected delirium prevalence. This study highlights a need for greater reporting and analysis of relevant healthcare systems data. This is vital to advance understanding of effective delirium detection in routine care

Protocol for validation of the 4AT, a rapid screening tool for delirium: a multicentre prospective diagnostic test accuracy study

INTRODUCTION:Delirium is a severe neuropsychiatric syndrome of rapid onset, commonly precipitated by acute illness. It is common in older people in the emergency department (ED) and acute hospital, but greatly under-recognised in these and other settings. Delirium and other forms of cognitive impairment, particularly dementia, commonly coexist. There is a need for a rapid delirium screening tool that can be administered by a range of professional-level healthcare staff to patients with sensory or functional impairments in a busy clinical environment, which also incorporates general cognitive assessment. We developed the 4 'A's Test (4AT) for this purpose. This study's primary objective is to validate the 4AT against a reference standard. Secondary objectives include (1) comparing the 4AT with another widely used test (the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM)); (2) determining if the 4AT is sensitive to general cognitive impairment; (3) assessing if 4AT scores predict outcomes, including (4) a health economic analysis.METHODS AND ANALYSIS:900 patients aged 70 or over in EDs or acute general medical wards will be recruited in three sites (Edinburgh, Bradford and Sheffield) over 18 months. Each patient will undergo a reference standard delirium assessment and will be randomised to assessment with either the 4AT or the CAM. At 12 weeks, outcomes (length of stay, institutionalisation and mortality) and resource utilisation will be collected by a questionnaire and via the electronic patient record.ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:Ethical approval was granted in Scotland and England. The study involves administering tests commonly used in clinical practice. The main ethical issues are the essential recruitment of people without capacity. Dissemination is planned via publication in high impact journals, presentation at conferences, social media and the website www.the4AT.com.TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:ISRCTN53388093; Pre-results

The 4 ‘A’s test for detecting delirium in acute medical patients: a diagnostic accuracy study

Background: Delirium is a common and serious neuropsychiatric syndrome, usually triggered by illness or drugs. It remains underdetected. One reason for this is a lack of brief, pragmatic assessment tools. The 4 ‘A’s test (Arousal, Attention, Abbreviated Mental Test – 4, Acute change) (4AT) is a screening tool designed for routine use. This project evaluated its usability, diagnostic accuracy and cost.Methods: Phase 1 – the usability of the 4AT in routine practice was measured with two surveys and two qualitative studies of health-care professionals, and a review of current clinical use of the 4AT as well as its presence in guidelines and reports. Phase 2 – the 4AT’s diagnostic accuracy was assessed in newly admitted acute medical patients aged ≥ 70 years. Its performance was compared with that of the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM; a longer screening tool). The performance of individual 4AT test items was related to cognitive status, length of stay, new institutionalisation, mortality at 12 weeks and outcomes. The method used was a prospective, double-blind diagnostic test accuracy study in emergency departments or in acute general medical wards in three UK sites. Each patient underwent a reference standard delirium assessment and was also randomised to receive an assessment with either the 4AT (n = 421) or the CAM (n = 420). A health economics analysis was also conducted.Results: Phase 1 found evidence that delirium awareness is increasing, but also that there is a need for education on delirium in general and on the 4AT in particular. Most users reported that the 4AT was useful, and it was in widespread use both in the UK and beyond. No changes to the 4AT were considered necessary. Phase 2 involved 785 individuals who had data for analysis; their mean age was 81.4 (standard deviation 6.4) years, 45% were male, 99% were white and 9% had a known dementia diagnosis. The 4AT (n = 392) had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.90. A positive 4AT score (&#x3e; 3) had a specificity of 95% [95% confidence interval (CI) 92% to 97%] and a sensitivity of 76% (95% CI 61% to 87%) for reference standard delirium. The CAM (n = 382) had a specificity of 100% (95% CI 98% to 100%) and a sensitivity of 40% (95% CI 26% to 57%) in the subset of participants whom it was possible to assess using this. Patients with positive 4AT scores had longer lengths of stay (median 5 days, interquartile range 2.0–14.0 days) than did those with negative 4AT scores (median 2 days, interquartile range 1.0–6.0 days), and they had a higher 12-week mortality rate (16.1% and 9.2%, respectively). The estimated 12-week costs of an initial inpatient stay for patients with delirium were more than double the costs of an inpatient stay for patients without delirium (e.g. in Scotland, £7559, 95% CI £7362 to £7755, vs. £4215, 95% CI £4175 to £4254). The estimated cost of false-positive cases was £4653, of false-negative cases was £8956, and of a missed diagnosis was £2067.Limitations: Patients were aged &#x22DD; 70 years and were assessed soon after they were admitted, limiting generalisability. The treatment of patients in accordance with reference standard diagnosis limited the ability to assess comparative cost-effectiveness.Conclusions: These findings support the use of the 4AT as a rapid delirium assessment instrument. The 4AT has acceptable diagnostic accuracy for acute older patients aged &#x3e; 70 years.Future work: Further research should address the real-world implementation of delirium assessment. The 4AT should be tested in other populations.Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN53388093.Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 40. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. The funder specified that any new delirium assessment tool should be compared against the CAM, but had no other role in the study design or conduct of the study

The 4 'A's test for detecting delirium in acute medical patients : a diagnostic accuracy study

Background Delirium is a common and serious neuropsychiatric syndrome, usually triggered by illness or drugs. It remains underdetected. One reason for this is a lack of brief, pragmatic assessment tools. The 4 ‘A’s test (Arousal, Attention, Abbreviated Mental Test – 4, Acute change) (4AT) is a screening tool designed for routine use. This project evaluated its usability, diagnostic accuracy and cost. Methods Phase 1 – the usability of the 4AT in routine practice was measured with two surveys and two qualitative studies of health-care professionals, and a review of current clinical use of the 4AT as well as its presence in guidelines and reports. Phase 2 – the 4AT’s diagnostic accuracy was assessed in newly admitted acute medical patients aged ≥ 70 years. Its performance was compared with that of the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM; a longer screening tool). The performance of individual 4AT test items was related to cognitive status, length of stay, new institutionalisation, mortality at 12 weeks and outcomes. The method used was a prospective, double-blind diagnostic test accuracy study in emergency departments or in acute general medical wards in three UK sites. Each patient underwent a reference standard delirium assessment and was also randomised to receive an assessment with either the 4AT (n = 421) or the CAM (n = 420). A health economics analysis was also conducted. Results Phase 1 found evidence that delirium awareness is increasing, but also that there is a need for education on delirium in general and on the 4AT in particular. Most users reported that the 4AT was useful, and it was in widespread use both in the UK and beyond. No changes to the 4AT were considered necessary. Phase 2 involved 785 individuals who had data for analysis; their mean age was 81.4 (standard deviation 6.4) years, 45% were male, 99% were white and 9% had a known dementia diagnosis. The 4AT (n = 392) had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.90. A positive 4AT score (> 3) had a specificity of 95% [95% confidence interval (CI) 92% to 97%] and a sensitivity of 76% (95% CI 61% to 87%) for reference standard delirium. The CAM (n = 382) had a specificity of 100% (95% CI 98% to 100%) and a sensitivity of 40% (95% CI 26% to 57%) in the subset of participants whom it was possible to assess using this. Patients with positive 4AT scores had longer lengths of stay (median 5 days, interquartile range 2.0–14.0 days) than did those with negative 4AT scores (median 2 days, interquartile range 1.0–6.0 days), and they had a higher 12-week mortality rate (16.1% and 9.2%, respectively). The estimated 12-week costs of an initial inpatient stay for patients with delirium were more than double the costs of an inpatient stay for patients without delirium (e.g. in Scotland, £7559, 95% CI £7362 to £7755, vs. £4215, 95% CI £4175 to £4254). The estimated cost of false-positive cases was £4653, of false-negative cases was £8956, and of a missed diagnosis was £2067. Limitations Patients were aged ≥ 70 years and were assessed soon after they were admitted, limiting generalisability. The treatment of patients in accordance with reference standard diagnosis limited the ability to assess comparative cost-effectiveness. Conclusions These findings support the use of the 4AT as a rapid delirium assessment instrument. The 4AT has acceptable diagnostic accuracy for acute older patients aged > 70 years. Future work Further research should address the real-world implementation of delirium assessment. The 4AT should be tested in other populations. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN53388093. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 40. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. The funder specified that any new delirium assessment tool should be compared against the CAM, but had no other role in the study design or conduct of the study

A smartphone-based test for the assessment of attention deficits in delirium: A case-control diagnostic test accuracy study in older hospitalised patients.

BACKGROUND: Delirium is a common and serious acute neuropsychiatric syndrome which is often missed in routine clinical care. Inattention is the core cognitive feature. Diagnostic test accuracy (including cut-points) of a smartphone Delirium App (DelApp) for assessing attention deficits was assessed in older hospital inpatients. METHODS: This was a case-control study of hospitalised patients aged ≥65 years with delirium (with or without pre-existing cognitive impairment), who were compared to patients with dementia without delirium, and patients without cognitive impairment. Reference standard delirium assessment, which included a neuropsychological test battery, was based on Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-5 criteria. A separate blinded assessor administered the DelApp arousal assessment (score 0-4) and attention task (0-6) yielding an overall score of 0 to 10 (lower scores indicate poorer performance). Analyses included receiver operating characteristic curves and sensitivity and specificity. Optimal cut-points for delirium detection were determined using Youden's index. RESULTS: A total of 187 patients were recruited, mean age 83.8 (range 67-98) years, 152 (81%) women; n = 61 with delirium; n = 61 with dementia without delirium; and n = 65 without cognitive impairment. Patients with delirium performed poorly on the DelApp (median score = 4/10; inter-quartile range 3.0, 5.5) compared to patients with dementia (9.0; 5.5, 10.0) and those without cognitive impairment (10.0; 10.0, 10.0). Area under the curve for detecting delirium was 0.89 (95% Confidence Interval 0.84, 0.94). At an optimal cut-point of ≤8, sensitivity was 91.7% (84.7%, 98.7%) and specificity 74.2% (66.5%, 81.9%) for discriminating delirium from the other groups. Specificity was 68.3% (56.6%, 80.1%) for discriminating delirium from dementia (cut-point ≤6). CONCLUSION: Patients with delirium (with or without pre-existing cognitive impairment) perform poorly on the DelApp compared to patients with dementia and those without cognitive impairment. A cut-point of ≤8/10 is suggested as having optimal sensitivity and specificity. The DelApp is a promising tool for assessment of attention deficits associated with delirium in older hospitalised adults, many of whom have prior cognitive impairment, and should be further validated in representative patient cohorts

Advancing specificity in delirium: The delirium subtyping initiative

BACKGROUND: Delirium, a common syndrome with heterogeneous etiologies and clinical presentations, is associated with poor long-term outcomes. Recording and analyzing all delirium equally could be hindering the field's understanding of pathophysiology and identification of targeted treatments. Current delirium subtyping methods reflect clinically evident features but likely do not account for underlying biology. METHODS: The Delirium Subtyping Initiative (DSI) held three sessions with an international panel of 25 experts. RESULTS: Meeting participants suggest further characterization of delirium features to complement the existing Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Fifth Edition Text Revision diagnostic criteria. These should span the range of delirium-spectrum syndromes and be measured consistently across studies. Clinical features should be recorded in conjunction with biospecimen collection, where feasible, in a standardized way, to determine temporal associations of biology coincident with clinical fluctuations. DISCUSSION: The DSI made recommendations spanning the breadth of delirium research including clinical features, study planning, data collection, and data analysis for characterization of candidate delirium subtypes. HIGHLIGHTS: Delirium features must be clearly defined, standardized, and operationalized. Large datasets incorporating both clinical and biomarker variables should be analyzed together. Delirium screening should incorporate communication and reasoning