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.

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.

Positive scores on the 4AT delirium assessment tool at hospital admission are linked to mortality, length of stay and home time: two-centre study of 82,770 emergency admissions.

BACKGROUND: Studies investigating outcomes of delirium using large-scale routine data are rare. We performed a two-centre study using the 4 'A's Test (4AT) delirium detection tool to analyse relationships between delirium and 30-day mortality, length of stay and home time (days at home in the year following admission). METHODS: The 4AT was performed as part of usual care. Data from emergency admissions in patients ≥65 years in Lothian, UK (n = 43,946) and Salford, UK (n = 38,824) over a period of $\sim$3 years were analysed using logistic regression models adjusted for age and sex. RESULTS: 4AT completion rates were 77% in Lothian and 49% in Salford. 4AT scores indicating delirium (≥4/12) were present in 18% of patients in Lothian, and 25% of patients in Salford. Thirty-day mortality with 4AT ≥4 was 5.5-fold greater than the 4AT 0/12 group in Lothian (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 5.53, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.99-6.13) and 3.4-fold greater in Salford (aOR 3.39, 95% CI 2.98-3.87). Length of stay was more than double in patients with 4AT scores of 1-3/12 (indicating cognitive impairment) or ≥ 4/12 compared with 4AT 0/12. Median home time at 1 year was reduced by 112 days (Lothian) and 61 days (Salford) in the 4AT ≥4 group (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Scores on the 4AT used at scale in practice are strongly linked with 30-day mortality, length of hospital stay and home time. The findings highlight the need for better understanding of why delirium is linked with poor outcomes and also the need to improve delirium detection and treatment.

Activity or connectivity? A randomized controlled feasibility study evaluating neurofeedback training in Huntington's disease.

Non-invasive methods, such as neurofeedback training, could support cognitive symptom management in Huntington's disease by targeting brain regions whose function is impaired. The aim of our single-blind, sham-controlled study was to collect rigorous evidence regarding the feasibility of neurofeedback training in Huntington's disease by examining two different methods, activity and connectivity real-time functional MRI neurofeedback training. Thirty-two Huntington's disease gene-carriers completed 16 runs of neurofeedback training, using an optimized real-time functional MRI protocol. Participants were randomized into four groups, two treatment groups, one receiving neurofeedback derived from the activity of the supplementary motor area, and another receiving neurofeedback based on the correlation of supplementary motor area and left striatum activity (connectivity neurofeedback training), and two sham control groups, matched to each of the treatment groups. We examined differences between the groups during neurofeedback training sessions and after training at follow-up sessions. Transfer of training was measured by measuring the participants' ability to upregulate neurofeedback training target levels without feedback (near transfer), as well as by examining change in objective, a priori defined, behavioural measures of cognitive and psychomotor function (far transfer) before and at 2 months after training. We found that the treatment group had significantly higher neurofeedback training target levels during the training sessions compared to the control group. However, we did not find robust evidence of better transfer in the treatment group compared to controls, or a difference between the two neurofeedback training methods. We also did not find evidence in support of a relationship between change in cognitive and psychomotor function and learning success. We conclude that although there is evidence that neurofeedback training can be used to guide participants to regulate the activity and connectivity of specific regions in the brain, evidence regarding transfer of learning and clinical benefit was not robust.