Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32274799›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Geriatrics Society2020

Family Identification of Delirium in the Emergency Department in Patients With and Without Dementia: Validity of the Family Confusion Assessment Method (FAM-CAM).

Tanya Mailhot, Chad Darling, Jillian Ela, Yelena Malyuta, Sharon K Inouye, Jane Saczynski

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Emergency Care for Persons Living with Dementia.Emergency medicine clinics of North America · 2025
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Enhancing healthcare access for an older population: The age-friendly emergency department.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2024
    Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Tanya MailhotDepartment of Pharmacy and Health System Sciences, Northeastern University, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Chad DarlingDepartment of Emergency Medicine, UMass Memorial Health Care, Worcester, Massachusetts, USA.
Jillian ElaNeurological Associates of Albany, Albany, New York, USA.
Yelena MalyutaHarvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Sharon K InouyeDepartment of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Jane SaczynskiDepartment of Pharmacy and Health System Sciences, Northeastern University, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

Funding

SCREENED ED (Screening Elderly for Delirium in the Emergency Department)R21AG049239 · NIA · UNIV OF MASSACHUSETTS MED SCH WORCESTER · PI DARLING, CHAD ERIC, SACZYNSKI, JANE STEELE · 2015 to 2016
$473k
Risk Factors for Delirium at DischargeR21AG025193 · NIA · HEBREW REHABILITATION CENTER FOR AGED · PI INOUYE, SHARON K · 2005 to 2006
$353k
NIA NIH HHS R21 AG025193NIA NIH HHS R21 AG049239
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo examine the ability of the family-rated Family Confusion Assessment Method (FAM-CAM) to identify delirium in the emergency department (ED) among patients with and without dementia, as compared to the reference-standard Confusion Assessment Method (CAM).

designValidation study.

settingUrban academic ED.

participantsDyads of ED patients, aged 70 years and older, and their family caregivers (N = 108 dyads). MEASUREMENTS: A trained reference standard interviewer performed a cognitive screen, delirium symptom assessment, and scored the CAM. The caregiver self-administered the FAM-CAM. Dementia was assessed using the Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly and the medical record. For concurrent validity, performance of the FAM-CAM was compared to the CAM. For predictive validity, clinical outcomes (ED visits, hospitalization, and mortality) over 6 months were compared in FAM-CAM positive and negative patients, controlling for age, sex, comorbidity, and cognitive status.

resultsAmong the 108 patients, 30 (28%) were CAM positive for delirium and 58 (54%) presented with dementia. The FAM-CAM had a specificity of 83% and a negative predictive value of 83%. Most false negatives (n = 9 of 13, 69%) were due to caregivers not identifying the inattention criteria for delirium on the FAM-CAM. In patients with dementia, sensitivity was higher than in patients without (61% vs 43%). In adjusted models, a hospitalization in the following 6 months was more than three times as likely in FAM-CAM positive compared to negative patients (odds ratio = 3.4; 95% confidence interval = 1.2-9.3).

conclusionsAmong patients with and without dementia, the FAM-CAM shows qualities that are important in the ED setting for identification of delirium. Using the FAM-CAM as part of a systematic screening strategy for the ED, in which families' assessments could supplement healthcare professionals' assessments, is promising. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:983-990, 2020.

Indexed as

CaregiversAgedAged, 80 and overCase-Control StudiesComorbidityDeliriumDementiaEmergency Service, HospitalFamilyFemaleHumansMaleMental Status and Dementia TestsPredictive Value of TestsProspective StudiesSingle-Blind Methoddeliriumdementiaemergency departmentFAM-CAMfamily caregivers

Identifiers

PMID32274799
PMCPMC7370702

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.