Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27346621›Full record

Observational studyJournal of the American Medical Directors Association2016

Detecting Delirium Superimposed on Dementia: Evaluation of the Diagnostic Performance of the Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale.

Alessandro Morandi, Jin H Han, David Meagher, Eduard Vasilevskis, Joaquim Cerejeira, Wolfgang Hasemann, Alasdair M J MacLullich, Giorgio Annoni, Marco Trabucchi, Giuseppe Bellelli

Abstract readMulticenter StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Emergency Care for Persons Living with Dementia.Emergency medicine clinics of North America · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Updates in the Assessment and Management of Agitation.Focus (American Psychiatric Publishing) · 2023
    Article
  9. Advancing the Care of Delirium and Comorbid Dementia.Geriatrics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Delirium: A Marker of Vulnerability in Older People.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2021
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Ultra-brief Screeners for Detecting Delirium Superimposed on Dementia.Journal of the American Medical Directors Association · 2019
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. The neuropsychology of delirium: advancing the science of delirium assessment.International journal of geriatric psychiatry · 2018
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Alessandro MorandiDepartment of Rehabilitation and Aged Care of the Fondazione Camplani, Ancelle Hospital, Cremona, Italy; Geriatric Research Group, Brescia, Italy. Electronic address: morandi.alessandro@gmail.com.
Jin H HanDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN.
David MeagherGraduate Entry Medical School, Cognitive Impairment Research Group, Centre for Interventions in Infection, Inflammation and Immunity, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland.
Eduard VasilevskisSection of Hospital Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine and Public Health, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN; Center for Quality Aging, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN; Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Center (GRECC), VA Tennessee Valley, Nashville, TN.
Joaquim CerejeiraServiço de Psiquiatria, Centro Hospitalar Universitário de Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal.
Wolfgang HasemannDepartment of Nursing and Allied Health Professions, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Alasdair M J MacLullichEdinburgh Delirium Research Group, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Giorgio AnnoniSchool of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milano-Bicocca and Geriatric Clinic, San Gerardo Hospital, Monza, Italy.
Marco TrabucchiGeriatric Research Group, Brescia, Italy; University of Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy.
Giuseppe BellelliGeriatric Research Group, Brescia, Italy; School of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milano-Bicocca and Geriatric Clinic, San Gerardo Hospital, Monza, Italy.

Funding

VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY CTSA FOR PEDIATRIC RESEARCHUL1RR024975 · NCRR · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI BERNARD, GORDON RAPHAEL · 2007 to 2011
$45.7M
The Vanderbilt Emergency Medicine Research Training Program (VEMRT)K12HL109019 · NHLBI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI COLLINS, SEAN PATRICK, STORROW, ALAN B · 2011 to 2015
$3.7M
Delirium in the Emergency Department: Novel Screening and Natural CourseK23AG032355 · NIA · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI HAN, JIN HO · 2010 to 2014
$745k
Predicting Acute Brain Dysfunction in Older Patients: A Quality Improvement ToolK23AG040157 · NIA · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI VASILEVSKIS, EDUARD E · 2011 to 2015
$609k
Medical Research Council G108/646NCRR NIH HHS UL1 RR024975NHLBI NIH HHS K12 HL109019NIA NIH HHS K23 AG032355NIA NIH HHS K23 AG040157
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesDelirium disproportionately affects patients with dementia and is associated with adverse outcomes. The diagnosis of delirium superimposed on dementia (DSD), however, can be challenging due to several factors, including the absence of caregivers or the severity of preexisting cognitive impairment. Altered level of consciousness has been advocated as a possible useful indicator of delirium in this population. Here we evaluated the performance of the Richmond Agitation and Sedation Scale (RASS) and the modified-RASS (m-RASS), an ultra-brief measure of the level of consciousness, in the diagnosis of DSD.

designMulticenter prospective observational study. RASS and m-RASS results were analyzed together, labeled RASS/m-RASS.

settingAcute geriatric wards, in-hospital rehabilitation, emergency department.

participantsPatients 65 years and older with dementia. MEASUREMENTS: Delirium was diagnosed with the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition (DSM-IV) or with the Delirium Rating Scale-Revised (DRS-R-98), or with the 4 A's Test (4AT). Dementia was detected with the Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) Scale, the Short Form-Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE) or via the clinical records.

resultsOf the 645 patients included, 376 (58%) had delirium. According to the instrument used to evaluate delirium, the prevalence was 66% with the 4AT, 23% with the DSM, and 100% with the DRS-R-98. Overall a RASS/m-RASS score other than 0 was 70.5% sensitive (95% confidence interval [CI] 65.9%-75.1%) and 84.8% (CI 80.5%-89.1%) specific for DSD. Using a RASS/m-RASS value greater than +1 or less than -1 as a cutoff, the sensitivity was 30.6% (CI 25.9%-35.2%) and the specificity was 95.5% (CI 93.1%-98.0%). The sensitivity and the specificity did not greatly vary according to the method of delirium diagnosis and the dementia ascertainment, although the specificity was slightly higher when the DSM and the IQCODE were used.

conclusionIn older patients admitted to different clinical settings, the RASS and m-RASS analyzed as a single group had moderate sensitivity and very high specificity for the detection of DSD. Level of consciousness is therefore a valuable clinical indicator that should form part of delirium screening strategies, although for higher sensitivity other methods of assessment should be used.

Indexed as

DementiaAgedAged, 80 and overDeliriumDiagnosis, DifferentialEmergency Service, HospitalHospitalizationHumansMaleProspective StudiesPsychiatric Status Rating ScalesPsychomotor AgitationSensitivity and SpecificityDeliriumdementiadiagnosism-RASSRASS

Identifiers

PMID27346621
PMCPMC5257263

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.