dc.contributor.author | Adamis, Dimitrios | |
dc.contributor.author | Meagher, David | |
dc.contributor.author | Murray, Orla | |
dc.contributor.author | O'Neill, Donagh | |
dc.contributor.author | O'Mahony, Edmond | |
dc.contributor.author | Mulligan, Owen | |
dc.contributor.author | McCarthy, Geraldine | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2018-09-20T15:58:58Z | |
dc.date.available | 2018-09-20T15:58:58Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2015-09-29 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Adamis, Dimitrios; Meagher, David; Murray, Orla; O'Neill, Donagh; O'Mahony, Edmond; Mulligan, Owen; McCarthy, Geraldine (2015). Evaluating attention in delirium: a comparison of bedside tests of attention. Geriatrics & Gerontology International 16 (9), 1028-1035 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 1444-1586 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10379/10121 | |
dc.description.abstract | AimImpaired attention is a core diagnostic feature for delirium. The present study examined the discriminating properties for patients with delirium versus those with dementia and/or no neurocognitive disorder of four objective tests of attention: digit span, vigilance A test, serial 7s subtraction and months of the year backwards together with global clinical subjective rating of attention.
MethodsThis as a prospective study of older patients admitted consecutively in a general hospital. Participants were assessed using the Confusion Assessment Method, Delirium Rating Scale-98 Revised and Montreal Cognitive Assessment scales, and months of the year backwards. Pre-existing dementia was diagnosed according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders fourth edition criteria.
ResultsThe sample consisted of 200 participants (mean age 81.16.5 years; 50% women; pre-existing cognitive impairment in 126 [63%]). A total of 34 (17%) were identified with delirium (Confusion Assessment Method +). The five approaches to assessing attention had statistically significant correlations (P<0.05). Discriminant analysis showed that clinical subjective rating of attention in conjunction with the months of the year backwards had the best discriminatory ability to identify Confusion Assessment Method-defined delirium, and to discriminate patients with delirium from those with dementia and/or normal cognition. Both of these approaches had high sensitivity, but modest specificity.
ConclusionObjective tests are useful for prediction of non-delirium, but lack specificity for a delirium diagnosis. Global attentional deficits were more indicative of delirium than deficits of specific domains of attention. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2016; 16: 1028-1035. | |
dc.publisher | Wiley-Blackwell | |
dc.relation.ispartof | Geriatrics & Gerontology International | |
dc.rights | Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Ireland | |
dc.rights.uri | https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ie/ | |
dc.subject | attention | |
dc.subject | attention tests | |
dc.subject | delirium | |
dc.subject | older people | |
dc.subject | psychometrics | |
dc.subject | older-adults | |
dc.subject | medical inpatients | |
dc.subject | dementia | |
dc.subject | disorder | |
dc.subject | anxiety | |
dc.title | Evaluating attention in delirium: a comparison of bedside tests of attention | |
dc.type | Article | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1111/ggi.12592 | |
dc.local.publishedsource | http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ggi.12592/pdf | |
nui.item.downloads | 0 | |