Comparative Implementation of a Brief App-Directed Protocol for Delirium Identification by Hospitalists, Nurses, and Nursing Assistants : A Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Systematic screening improves delirium identification among hospitalized older adults. Little data exist on how to implement such screening. OBJECTIVE: To test implementation of a brief app-directed protocol for delirium identification by physicians, nurses, and certified nursing assistants (CNAs) in real-world practice relative to a research reference standard delirium assessment (RSDA). DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Large urban academic medical center and small rural community hospital. PARTICIPANTS: 527 general medicine inpatients (mean age, 80 years; 35% with preexisting dementia) and 399 clinicians (53 hospitalists, 236 nurses, and 110 CNAs). MEASUREMENTS: On 2 study days, enrolled patients had an RSDA. Subsequently, CNAs performed an ultra-brief 2-item screen (UB-2) for delirium, whereas physicians and nurses performed a 2-step protocol consisting of the UB-2 followed in those with a positive screen result by the 3-Minute Diagnostic Assessment for the Confusion Assessment Method. RESULTS: Delirium was diagnosed in 154 of 924 RSDAs (17%) and in 114 of 527 patients (22%). The completion rate for clinician protocols exceeded 97%. The CNAs administered the UB-2 in a mean of 62 seconds (SD, 51). The 2-step protocols were administered in means of 104 seconds (SD, 99) by nurses and 106 seconds (SD, 105) by physicians. The UB-2 had sensitivities of 88% (95% CI, 72% to 96%), 87% (CI, 73% to 95%), and 82% (CI, 65% to 91%) when administered by CNAs, nurses, and physicians, respectively, with specificities of 64% to 70%. The 2-step protocol had overall accuracy of 89% (CI, 83% to 93%) and 87% (CI, 81% to 91%), with sensitivities of 65% (CI, 48% to 79%) and 63% (CI, 46% to 77%) and specificities of 93% (CI, 88% to 96%) and 91% (CI, 86% to 95%), for nurses and physicians, respectively. Two-step protocol sensitivity for moderate to severe delirium was 78% (CI, 54% to 91%). LIMITATION: Two sites; limited diversity. CONCLUSION: An app-directed protocol for delirium identification was feasible, brief, and accurate, and CNAs and nurses performed as well as hospitalists. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute on Aging.

Pilot Study of a Two-Step Delirium Detection Protocol Administered By Certified Nursing Assistants, Physicians, and Registered Nurses.

The feasibility and acceptability of a two-step screening protocol for delirium identification was pilot tested. Step 1, a screening tool, comprises two items: "Please tell me the day of the week," and "Please tell me the months of the year backwards starting with December." If either/both items are incorrect, Step 2, a 3-minute diagnostic assessment, follows. Trained researchers enrolled 24 hospitalized older adults and identified 22% to be delirious after a reference standard assessment. Thereafter, physicians and RNs completed the two-step protocol, whereas certified nursing assistants (CNAs) completed the screener only, on the same patients. All three clinical assessments were successfully completed in 100% of enrolled participants and within the target 2-hour time window in 91%. The screener and two-step protocol achieved high sensitivities and specificities in RNs, CNAs, and physicians. Qualitative information on barriers to and facilitators of implementation was also collected. Nurses and other clinicians can feasibly implement this ultra-brief screener and two-step protocol, which holds promise to improve delirium identification. [Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 44(5), 18-24.].

Implementing a Rapid, Two-Step Delirium Screening Protocol in Acute Care: Barriers and Facilitators.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: An effective and efficient protocol for delirium identification is needed to improve health outcomes for older adults and reduce healthcare costs. This study describes the barriers and facilitators related to the implementation of the ultra-brief confusion assessment method (UB-CAM), a rapid two-step delirium identification protocol (ultra-brief screen, followed by CAM in positives), field tested with hospitalized older adults (70+). DESIGN: A qualitative descriptive design using observational data collection and brief semi-structured interviews. SETTINGS: An urban academic medical center and a community teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Participants included 50 physician hospitalists, 189 registered nurses, and 83 nursing assistants (NAs). MEASUREMENTS: Field researchers guided by a modified multi-level implementation framework, collected observational data as participants administered the UB-CAM (n = 767). Thematic analysis was conducted on five observational categories: structural, organizational, patient, clinician, and innovation. Field notes and brief semi-structured interviews (n = 231) with clinicians, explored the utility, acceptability, and feasibility of the protocol, and supplemented the observations. RESULTS: The UB-CAM was generally positively received by all three clinician types. Six themes describe barriers and/or facilitators to implementing the UB-CAM: (1) physical setting and milieu; (2) practice environment; (3) integrating into role; (4) adaptive techniques; (5) patient responses; and (6) systematic assessment. The composition and interaction of the six themes determined if the theme was expressed as a barrier or facilitator, affirming the importance of context when implementing system-level delirium screening. CONCLUSION: This is one of the first studies to test a two-step process for delirium identification, and to involve NAs in screening, and the findings demonstrate overall support from clinicians for delirium identification, and describe the need for a multifaceted, contextualized, and systemic approach to implementation and evaluation of delirium screening.