TY - JOUR
T1 - Evaluation of the 3-Minute Diagnostic Confusion Assessment Method for Identification of Postoperative Delirium in Older Patients
AU - Oberhaus, Jordan
AU - Wang, Wei
AU - Mickle, Angela M.
AU - Becker, Jennifer
AU - Tedeschi, Catherine
AU - Maybrier, Hannah R.
AU - Upadhyayula, Ravi T.
AU - Muench, Maxwell R.
AU - Lin, Nan
AU - Schmitt, Eva M.
AU - Inouye, Sharon K.
AU - Avidan, Michael S.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
PY - 2021/12/13
Y1 - 2021/12/13
N2 - IMPORTANCE Delirium is a common postoperative complication in older patients that often goes undetected and might lead to worse outcomes. The 3-Minute Diagnostic Confusion Assessment Method (3D-CAM) might be a practical tool for routine clinical diagnosis of delirium. OBJECTIVE To assess the 3D-CAM for detecting postoperative delirium compared with the long-form CAM used for research purposes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This cohort study of older patients enrolled in ongoing clinical trials between 2015 and 2018 was conducted at a single tertiary US hospital. Included participants were aged 60 years or older undergoing major elective surgical procedures that required at least a 2-day hospital stay. Data were analyzed between February and April 2019. EXPOSURES Surgical procedures of at least 2 hours in length requiring general anesthesia with planned extubation. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Patients were concurrently assessed for delirium using the 3D-CAM assessment and the long-form CAM, scored based on a standardized cognitive assessment. Agreement between these 2 methods was tested using Cohen κ with repeated measures, a generalized linear mixed-effects model, and Bland-Altman analysis. RESULTS Sixteen raters conducted 471 concurrent CAM and 3D-CAM interviews including 299 patients (mean [SD] age, 69 [6.5] years), the majority of whom were men (152 [50.8%]), were White (263 [88.0%]), and had noncardiac operations (211 [70.6%]). Both instruments had good intraclass correlation (0.84 for the CAM and 0.98 for the 3D-CAM). Cohen κ demonstrated good overall agreement between the CAM and 3D-CAM (κ = 0.71; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.83). According to the mixed-effects model, there was statistically significant disagreement between the 3D-CAM and CAM (estimated difference in fixed effect, −0.68; 95% CI, −1.32 to −0.05; P = .04). Bland-Altman analysis showed the probability of a delirium diagnosis with the 3D-CAM was more than twice the probability of a delirium diagnosis with the CAM (probability ratio, 2.78; 95% CI, 2.44 to 3.23). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The 3D-CAM instrument demonstrated agreement with the long-form CAM and might provide a pragmatic and sensitive clinical tool for detecting postoperative delirium, with the caveat that the 3D-CAM might overdiagnose delirium.
AB - IMPORTANCE Delirium is a common postoperative complication in older patients that often goes undetected and might lead to worse outcomes. The 3-Minute Diagnostic Confusion Assessment Method (3D-CAM) might be a practical tool for routine clinical diagnosis of delirium. OBJECTIVE To assess the 3D-CAM for detecting postoperative delirium compared with the long-form CAM used for research purposes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This cohort study of older patients enrolled in ongoing clinical trials between 2015 and 2018 was conducted at a single tertiary US hospital. Included participants were aged 60 years or older undergoing major elective surgical procedures that required at least a 2-day hospital stay. Data were analyzed between February and April 2019. EXPOSURES Surgical procedures of at least 2 hours in length requiring general anesthesia with planned extubation. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Patients were concurrently assessed for delirium using the 3D-CAM assessment and the long-form CAM, scored based on a standardized cognitive assessment. Agreement between these 2 methods was tested using Cohen κ with repeated measures, a generalized linear mixed-effects model, and Bland-Altman analysis. RESULTS Sixteen raters conducted 471 concurrent CAM and 3D-CAM interviews including 299 patients (mean [SD] age, 69 [6.5] years), the majority of whom were men (152 [50.8%]), were White (263 [88.0%]), and had noncardiac operations (211 [70.6%]). Both instruments had good intraclass correlation (0.84 for the CAM and 0.98 for the 3D-CAM). Cohen κ demonstrated good overall agreement between the CAM and 3D-CAM (κ = 0.71; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.83). According to the mixed-effects model, there was statistically significant disagreement between the 3D-CAM and CAM (estimated difference in fixed effect, −0.68; 95% CI, −1.32 to −0.05; P = .04). Bland-Altman analysis showed the probability of a delirium diagnosis with the 3D-CAM was more than twice the probability of a delirium diagnosis with the CAM (probability ratio, 2.78; 95% CI, 2.44 to 3.23). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The 3D-CAM instrument demonstrated agreement with the long-form CAM and might provide a pragmatic and sensitive clinical tool for detecting postoperative delirium, with the caveat that the 3D-CAM might overdiagnose delirium.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85121266362&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.37267
DO - 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.37267
M3 - Article
C2 - 34902038
AN - SCOPUS:85121266362
SN - 2574-3805
VL - 4
SP - e2137267
JO - JAMA Network Open
JF - JAMA Network Open
IS - 12
ER -