The 4 'A's test for detecting delirium in acute medical patients: a diagnostic accuracy study.


Journal

Health technology assessment (Winchester, England)
ISSN: 2046-4924
Titre abrégé: Health Technol Assess
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9706284

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
08 2019
Historique:
entrez: 10 8 2019
pubmed: 10 8 2019
medline: 9 10 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Delirium is a common and serious neuropsychiatric syndrome, usually triggered by illness or drugs. It remains underdetected. One reason for this is a lack of brief, pragmatic assessment tools. The 4 'A's test (Arousal, Attention, Abbreviated Mental Test - 4, Acute change) (4AT) is a screening tool designed for routine use. This project evaluated its usability, diagnostic accuracy and cost. Phase 1 - the usability of the 4AT in routine practice was measured with two surveys and two qualitative studies of health-care professionals, and a review of current clinical use of the 4AT as well as its presence in guidelines and reports. Phase 2 - the 4AT's diagnostic accuracy was assessed in newly admitted acute medical patients aged ≥ 70 years. Its performance was compared with that of the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM; a longer screening tool). The performance of individual 4AT test items was related to cognitive status, length of stay, new institutionalisation, mortality at 12 weeks and outcomes. The method used was a prospective, double-blind diagnostic test accuracy study in emergency departments or in acute general medical wards in three UK sites. Each patient underwent a reference standard delirium assessment and was also randomised to receive an assessment with either the 4AT ( Phase 1 found evidence that delirium awareness is increasing, but also that there is a need for education on delirium in general and on the 4AT in particular. Most users reported that the 4AT was useful, and it was in widespread use both in the UK and beyond. No changes to the 4AT were considered necessary. Phase 2 involved 785 individuals who had data for analysis; their mean age was 81.4 (standard deviation 6.4) years, 45% were male, 99% were white and 9% had a known dementia diagnosis. The 4AT ( Patients were aged ≥ 70 years and were assessed soon after they were admitted, limiting generalisability. The treatment of patients in accordance with reference standard diagnosis limited the ability to assess comparative cost-effectiveness. These findings support the use of the 4AT as a rapid delirium assessment instrument. The 4AT has acceptable diagnostic accuracy for acute older patients aged > 70 years. Further research should address the real-world implementation of delirium assessment. The 4AT should be tested in other populations. Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN53388093. This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Delirium is the sudden onset of confusion that can happen when someone is unwell. It is common in older people who go into hospital, and it is upsetting for both the patients and their families. Delirium is important to diagnose, because people with delirium do less well than those without, and it is often treatable. The ideal way to diagnose delirium is with a full assessment by a specialist, but this is expensive and time-consuming. We therefore developed a short test called the 4 ‘A’s Test (4AT). The four ‘A’s stand for Arousal, Attention, Abbreviated Mental Test – 4, and Acute change. First, we interviewed hospital staff about delirium and the 4AT. We found that the 4AT was already widely used and that people found it easy to use. We then tested how the 4AT performed in practice. A total of 785 recently admitted patients aged ≥ 70 years participated, of whom around one in eight had delirium. A researcher carried out the full standard delirium assessment on each patient and then a different researcher carried out the 4AT. A normal 4AT score reliably ruled out delirium. An abnormal score was also reasonably effective in detecting delirium, but staff still needed to follow up such patients with a full assessment. People with higher 4AT scores stayed in hospital longer and were more likely to die, and their treatment was more expensive. We conclude that the 4AT is a useful test to rule out delirium or to see if more detailed testing is required. It could help treat patients correctly and quickly. This would save money and improve outcomes.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Delirium is a common and serious neuropsychiatric syndrome, usually triggered by illness or drugs. It remains underdetected. One reason for this is a lack of brief, pragmatic assessment tools. The 4 'A's test (Arousal, Attention, Abbreviated Mental Test - 4, Acute change) (4AT) is a screening tool designed for routine use. This project evaluated its usability, diagnostic accuracy and cost.
METHODS
Phase 1 - the usability of the 4AT in routine practice was measured with two surveys and two qualitative studies of health-care professionals, and a review of current clinical use of the 4AT as well as its presence in guidelines and reports. Phase 2 - the 4AT's diagnostic accuracy was assessed in newly admitted acute medical patients aged ≥ 70 years. Its performance was compared with that of the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM; a longer screening tool). The performance of individual 4AT test items was related to cognitive status, length of stay, new institutionalisation, mortality at 12 weeks and outcomes. The method used was a prospective, double-blind diagnostic test accuracy study in emergency departments or in acute general medical wards in three UK sites. Each patient underwent a reference standard delirium assessment and was also randomised to receive an assessment with either the 4AT (
RESULTS
Phase 1 found evidence that delirium awareness is increasing, but also that there is a need for education on delirium in general and on the 4AT in particular. Most users reported that the 4AT was useful, and it was in widespread use both in the UK and beyond. No changes to the 4AT were considered necessary. Phase 2 involved 785 individuals who had data for analysis; their mean age was 81.4 (standard deviation 6.4) years, 45% were male, 99% were white and 9% had a known dementia diagnosis. The 4AT (
LIMITATIONS
Patients were aged ≥ 70 years and were assessed soon after they were admitted, limiting generalisability. The treatment of patients in accordance with reference standard diagnosis limited the ability to assess comparative cost-effectiveness.
CONCLUSIONS
These findings support the use of the 4AT as a rapid delirium assessment instrument. The 4AT has acceptable diagnostic accuracy for acute older patients aged > 70 years.
FUTURE WORK
Further research should address the real-world implementation of delirium assessment. The 4AT should be tested in other populations.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN53388093.
FUNDING
This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in
Delirium is the sudden onset of confusion that can happen when someone is unwell. It is common in older people who go into hospital, and it is upsetting for both the patients and their families. Delirium is important to diagnose, because people with delirium do less well than those without, and it is often treatable. The ideal way to diagnose delirium is with a full assessment by a specialist, but this is expensive and time-consuming. We therefore developed a short test called the 4 ‘A’s Test (4AT). The four ‘A’s stand for Arousal, Attention, Abbreviated Mental Test – 4, and Acute change. First, we interviewed hospital staff about delirium and the 4AT. We found that the 4AT was already widely used and that people found it easy to use. We then tested how the 4AT performed in practice. A total of 785 recently admitted patients aged ≥ 70 years participated, of whom around one in eight had delirium. A researcher carried out the full standard delirium assessment on each patient and then a different researcher carried out the 4AT. A normal 4AT score reliably ruled out delirium. An abnormal score was also reasonably effective in detecting delirium, but staff still needed to follow up such patients with a full assessment. People with higher 4AT scores stayed in hospital longer and were more likely to die, and their treatment was more expensive. We conclude that the 4AT is a useful test to rule out delirium or to see if more detailed testing is required. It could help treat patients correctly and quickly. This would save money and improve outcomes.

Autres résumés

Type: plain-language-summary (eng)
Delirium is the sudden onset of confusion that can happen when someone is unwell. It is common in older people who go into hospital, and it is upsetting for both the patients and their families. Delirium is important to diagnose, because people with delirium do less well than those without, and it is often treatable. The ideal way to diagnose delirium is with a full assessment by a specialist, but this is expensive and time-consuming. We therefore developed a short test called the 4 ‘A’s Test (4AT). The four ‘A’s stand for Arousal, Attention, Abbreviated Mental Test – 4, and Acute change. First, we interviewed hospital staff about delirium and the 4AT. We found that the 4AT was already widely used and that people found it easy to use. We then tested how the 4AT performed in practice. A total of 785 recently admitted patients aged ≥ 70 years participated, of whom around one in eight had delirium. A researcher carried out the full standard delirium assessment on each patient and then a different researcher carried out the 4AT. A normal 4AT score reliably ruled out delirium. An abnormal score was also reasonably effective in detecting delirium, but staff still needed to follow up such patients with a full assessment. People with higher 4AT scores stayed in hospital longer and were more likely to die, and their treatment was more expensive. We conclude that the 4AT is a useful test to rule out delirium or to see if more detailed testing is required. It could help treat patients correctly and quickly. This would save money and improve outcomes.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31397263
doi: 10.3310/hta23400
pmc: PMC6709509
doi:

Banques de données

ISRCTN
['ISRCTN53388093']

Types de publication

Clinical Trial Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

1-194

Subventions

Organisme : Department of Health
ID : 11/143/01
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : G108/646
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Department of Health
ID : PB-PG-0610-22068
Pays : United Kingdom

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

No competing interests were declared.

Auteurs

Alasdair Mj MacLullich (AM)

Geriatric Medicine, Division of Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

Susan D Shenkin (SD)

Geriatric Medicine, Division of Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

Steve Goodacre (S)

Emergency Medicine, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.

Mary Godfrey (M)

Health and Social Care, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, School of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.

Janet Hanley (J)

School of Health and Social Care, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, UK.

Antaine Stíobhairt (A)

Geriatric Medicine, Division of Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

Elizabeth Lavender (E)

Health and Social Care, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, School of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.

Julia Boyd (J)

Edinburgh Clinical Trials Unit, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

Jacqueline Stephen (J)

Edinburgh Clinical Trials Unit, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

Christopher Weir (C)

Edinburgh Clinical Trials Unit, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

Allan MacRaild (A)

Emergency Medicine Research Group (EMERGE), NHS Lothian, Edinburgh, UK.

Jill Steven (J)

Emergency Medicine Research Group (EMERGE), NHS Lothian, Edinburgh, UK.

Polly Black (P)

Emergency Medicine Research Group (EMERGE), NHS Lothian, Edinburgh, UK.

Katharina Diernberger (K)

Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Emergency Medicine Research Group (EMERGE), NHS Lothian, Edinburgh, UK.

Peter Hall (P)

Edinburgh Clinical Trials Unit, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

Zoë Tieges (Z)

Geriatric Medicine, Division of Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

Christopher Fox (C)

Norwich Medical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.

Atul Anand (A)

Geriatric Medicine, Division of Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

John Young (J)

Bradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Royal Infirmary, Bradford, UK.

Najma Siddiqi (N)

Psychiatry, University of York, York.
Hull York Medical School, York, UK.
Bradford District Care NHS Foundation Trust, Bradford, UK.

Alasdair Gray (A)

Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Emergency Medicine Research Group (EMERGE), NHS Lothian, Edinburgh, UK.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH