Skip to main content

Research Repository

Advanced Search

Delirium detection in older acute medical inpatients: a multicentre prospective comparative diagnostic test accuracy study of the 4AT and the Confusion Assessment Method

Shenkin, Susan; Fox, Christopher; Godfrey, Mary; Siddiqi, Najma; Goodacre, Steve; Young, John; Anand, Atul; Gray, Alasdair; Hanley, Janet; MacRaild, Allan; Steven, Jill; Black, Polly; Tieges, Zo�; Boyd, Julia; Stephen, Jacqueline; Weir, Christopher; MacLullich, Alasdair

Authors

Susan Shenkin

Christopher Fox

Mary Godfrey

Najma Siddiqi

Steve Goodacre

John Young

Atul Anand

Alasdair Gray

Allan MacRaild

Jill Steven

Polly Black

Zo� Tieges

Julia Boyd

Jacqueline Stephen

Christopher Weir

Alasdair MacLullich



Abstract

Background:
Delirium affects >15% of hospitalised patients but is grossly underdetected, contributing to poor care. The 4 ‘A’s Test (4AT; www.the4AT.com) is a short delirium assessment tool designed for routine use without special training. The primary objective was to assess the accuracy of the 4AT for delirium detection. The secondary objective was to compare the 4AT with another commonly-used delirium assessment tool, the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM).
Methods:
This was a prospective diagnostic test accuracy study set in Emergency Departments or acute medical wards involving acute medical patients aged >=70. All those without acutely life-threatening illness or coma were eligible. Patients underwent (1) reference standard delirium assessment based on DSM-IV criteria and (2) were randomised to either the index test (4AT, scores 0-12; prespecified score of >3 considered positive) or the comparator (CAM; scored positive or negative), in a random order, using computer-generated pseudo random numbers, stratified by study site, with block allocation. Reference standard and 4AT or CAM assessments were performed by pairs of independent raters blinded to the results of the other assessment.
Results:
843 individuals were randomised: 21 withdrew, 3 lost contact, 32 indeterminate diagnosis, 2 missing outcome; 785 were included in the analysis. Mean age was 81.4 (SD 6.4) years. 12.1% (95/785) had delirium by reference 1 standard assessment, 14.3% (56/392) by 4AT, and 4.7% (18/384) by CAM. The 4AT had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.90 (95% CI 0.84-0.96). The 4AT had a sensitivity of 76% (95% CI 61-87%) and a specificity of 94% (95% CI 92-97%). The CAM had a sensitivity of 40% (95% CI 26- 57%) and a specificity of 100% (95% CI 98-100%).
Conclusions:
The 4AT is a short, pragmatic tool which can help improving detection rates of delirium in routine clinical care.

Citation

Shenkin, S., Fox, C., Godfrey, M., Siddiqi, N., Goodacre, S., Young, J., Anand, A., Gray, A., Hanley, J., MacRaild, A., Steven, J., Black, P., Tieges, Z., Boyd, J., Stephen, J., Weir, C., & MacLullich, A. (2019). Delirium detection in older acute medical inpatients: a multicentre prospective comparative diagnostic test accuracy study of the 4AT and the Confusion Assessment Method. BMC Medicine, 17, Article 138. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-019-1367-9

Journal Article Type Article
Acceptance Date Jun 13, 2019
Online Publication Date Jul 24, 2019
Publication Date Jul 24, 2019
Deposit Date Jun 18, 2019
Publicly Available Date Jul 24, 2019
Electronic ISSN 1741-7015
Publisher BMC
Peer Reviewed Peer Reviewed
Volume 17
Article Number 138
DOI https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-019-1367-9
Keywords Delirium; diagnostic test accuracy; 4AT; Confusion Assessment Method (CAM); sensitivity; specificity; hospital
Public URL http://researchrepository.napier.ac.uk/Output/1890726
Contract Date Jun 18, 2019

Files

Delirium Detection In Older Acute Medical Inpatients: A Multicentre Prospective Comparative Diagnostic Test Accuracy Study Of The 4AT And The Confusion Assessment Method (2.1 Mb)
PDF

Publisher Licence URL
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Copyright Statement
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).






You might also like



Downloadable Citations