dc.contributor.author
Nacul, Flavio E.
dc.contributor.author
Paul, Nicolas
dc.contributor.author
Spies, Claudia D.
dc.contributor.author
Sechting, Henriette
dc.contributor.author
Hecht, Thomas
dc.contributor.author
Dullinger, Jörn S.
dc.contributor.author
Piper, Sophie K.
dc.contributor.author
Luetz, Alawi
dc.contributor.author
Balzer, Felix S.
dc.contributor.author
Wernecke, Klaus-Dieter
dc.contributor.author
Sa, Anna Karinina
dc.contributor.author
Barros Ferreira da Costa, Carolina
dc.contributor.author
Eymold, Lisa
dc.contributor.author
Chenitir, Chokri
dc.contributor.author
Weiss, Björn
dc.date.accessioned
2020-10-29T14:16:14Z
dc.date.available
2020-10-29T14:16:14Z
dc.identifier.uri
https://refubium.fu-berlin.de/handle/fub188/28196
dc.identifier.uri
http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/refubium-27946
dc.description.abstract
Background and objectives:
The use of delirium screening instruments (DSIs) is recommended in critical care practice for a timely detection of delirium. We hypothesize that the patient-related factors "level of sedation" and "mechanical ventilation" impact test validity of DSIs.
Materials and Methods:
This is a prospective, bi-center observational study (clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01720914). Critically ill patients were screened for delirium daily for up to seven days after enrollment using the Nursing Delirium Screening Scale (Nu-DESC), Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist (ICDSC), and Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU). Reference standard for delirium diagnosis was the neuropsychiatric examination using the criteria of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR). Immediately before delirium assessment, ventilation status and sedation levels were documented.
Results:
160 patients were enrolled and 151 patients went into final analysis. Delirium incidence was 23.2%. Nu-DESC showed a sensitivity and specificity of 88.5%, a positive predictive value (PPV) of 71.9%, and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 95.8%. ICDSC had a sensitivity of 62.5%, a specificity of 92.4%, a PPV of 71.4%, and a NPV of 89.0%. CAM-ICU showed a sensitivity of 75.0%, a specificity of 94.7%, a PPV of 85.7%, and a NPV of 90.0%. For Nu-DESC and ICDSC, test validity was significantly better for non-sedated patients (Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS) 0/-1), whereas test validity for CAM-ICU in a severity scale version showed no significant differences for different sedation levels. No DSI showed a significant difference in test validity between noninvasively and invasively ventilated patients.
Conclusions:
Test validities of DSIs were comparable to previous studies. The observational scores ICDSC and Nu-DESC showed a significantly better performance in awake and drowsy patients (RASS 0/-1) when compared with other sedation levels. Physicians should refrain from sedation whenever possible to avoid suboptimal performance of DSIs.
en
dc.rights.uri
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subject
critical illness
en
dc.subject
intensive care
en
dc.subject
sensitivity and specificity
en
dc.subject
test validity
en
dc.subject.ddc
600 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften::610 Medizin und Gesundheit::610 Medizin und Gesundheit
dc.title
Influence of Sedation Level and Ventilation Status on the Diagnostic Validity of Delirium Screening Tools in the ICU—An International, Prospective, Bi-Center Observational Study (IDeAS)
dc.type
Wissenschaftlicher Artikel
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.articlenumber
411
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.doi
10.3390/medicina56080411
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.journaltitle
Medicina
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.number
8
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.originalpublishername
MDPI AG
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.volume
56
refubium.affiliation
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin
refubium.resourceType.isindependentpub
no
dcterms.accessRights.openaire
open access
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.pmid
32823781
dcterms.isPartOf.eissn
1648-9144