Abstract

BackgroundInformation on validity and reliability of delirium criteria is necessary for clinicians, researchers, and further developments of DSM or ICD. We compare four DSM and ICD delirium diagnostic criteria versions, which were developed by consensus of experts, with a phenomenology-based natural diagnosis delineated using cluster analysis of delirium features in a sample with a high prevalence of dementia. We also measured inter-rater reliability of each system when applied by two evaluators from distinct disciplines.MethodsCross-sectional analysis of 200 consecutive patients admitted to a skilled nursing facility, independently assessed within 24–48 h after admission with the Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98 (DRS-R98) and for DSM-III-R, DSM-IV, DSM-5, and ICD-10 criteria for delirium. Cluster analysis (CA) delineated natural delirium and nondelirium reference groups using DRS-R98 items and then diagnostic systems’ performance were evaluated against the CA-defined groups using logistic regression and crosstabs for discriminant analysis (sensitivity, specificity, percentage of subjects correctly classified by each diagnostic system and their individual criteria, and performance for each system when excluding each individual criterion are reported). Kappa Index (K) was used to report inter-rater reliability for delirium diagnostic systems and their individual criteria.Results117 (58.5 %) patients had preexisting dementia according to the Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly. CA delineated 49 delirium subjects and 151 nondelirium. Against these CA groups, delirium diagnosis accuracy was highest using DSM-III-R (87.5 %) followed closely by DSM-IV (86.0 %), ICD-10 (85.5 %) and DSM-5 (84.5 %). ICD-10 had the highest specificity (96.0 %) but lowest sensitivity (53.1 %). DSM-III-R had the best sensitivity (81.6 %) and the best sensitivity-specificity balance. DSM-5 had the highest inter-rater reliability (K =0.73) while DSM-III-R criteria were the least reliable.ConclusionsUsing our CA-defined, phenomenologically-based delirium designations as the reference standard, we found performance discordance among four diagnostic systems when tested in subjects where comorbid dementia was prevalent. The most complex diagnostic systems have higher accuracy and the newer DSM-5 have higher reliability. Our novel phenomenological approach to designing a delirium reference standard may be preferred to guide revisions of diagnostic systems in the future.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12888-016-0878-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Highlights

  • Information on validity and reliability of delirium criteria is necessary for clinicians, researchers, and further developments of diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (DSM) or international classification of diseases (ICD)

  • Using our Cluster analysis (CA)-defined, phenomenologically-based delirium designations as the reference standard, we found performance discordance among four diagnostic systems when tested in subjects where comorbid dementia was prevalent

  • Inter-rater reliability of DSM and ICD criteria for delirium We report Kappa Index (K) with its 95 % confidence interval (CI) and Standard Error (SE) as measure of reliability of all diagnostic criteria and items

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Information on validity and reliability of delirium criteria is necessary for clinicians, researchers, and further developments of DSM or ICD. We compare four DSM and ICD delirium diagnostic criteria versions, which were developed by consensus of experts, with a phenomenology-based natural diagnosis delineated using cluster analysis of delirium features in a sample with a high prevalence of dementia. Valid and reliable diagnostic criteria in order to correctly classify delirium are fundamental to guide identification, management and prognosis [1]. Without an measured biological marker for delirium, its diagnostic criteria are the only gold standard for clinical diagnosis. Criteria have been evolving through iterations since the 1960’s. The use of criteria largely relying on experts’ consensus and epidemiological research can be circular [2,3,4]. Iterations of diagnostic classification systems may result in different delirium diagnosis status in the same patient population

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call