5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      “SQiD, the Single Question in Delirium; can a single question help clinicians to detect delirium in hospitalised cancer patients?” running heading Single Question in Delirium” (Bcan-D-20-01665)

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Aim

          A serious syndrome for cancer in-patients, delirium risk increases with age and medical acuity. Screening tools exist but detection is frequently delayed or missed. We test the ‘Single Question in Delirium’ (SQiD), in comparison to psychiatrist clinical interview.

          Methods

          Inpatients in two comprehensive cancer centres were prospectively screened. Clinical staff asked informants to respond to the SQiD: “Do you feel that [patient’s name] has been more confused lately?”. The primary endpoint was negative predictive value (NPV) of the SQiD versus psychiatrist diagnosis (Diagnostic and Statistics Manual criteria). Secondary endpoints included: NPV of the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM), sensitivity, specificity and Cohen’s Kappa coefficient.

          Results

          Between May 2012 and July 2015, the SQiD plus CAM was applied to 122 patients; 73 had the SQiD and psychiatrist interview. Median age was 65 yrs. (interquartile range 54–74), 46% were female; median length of hospital stay was 12 days (5–18 days). Major cancer types were lung (19%), gastric or other upper GI (15%) and breast (14%). 70% of participants had stage 4 cancer. Diagnostic values were similar between the SQiD (NPV = 74, 95% CI 67–81; kappa = 0.32) and CAM (NPV = 72, 95% CI 67–77, kappa = 0.32), compared with psychiatrist interview. Overall the CAM identified only a small number of delirious cases but all were true positives. The specificity of the SQiD was 87% (74–95) The SQiD had higher sensitivity than CAM (44% [95% CI 41–80] vs 26% [10–48]).

          Conclusion

          The SQiD, administered by bedside clinical staff, was feasible and its psychometric properties are now better understood. The SQiD can contribute to delirium detection and clinical care for hospitalised cancer patients.

          Supplementary information

          Supplementary information accompanies this paper at 10.1186/s12885-020-07504-x.

          Related collections

          Most cited references29

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Diagnostic tests. 1: Sensitivity and specificity.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Book: not found

            Statistical methods for rates and proportions.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              A multicomponent intervention to prevent delirium in hospitalized older patients.

              Since in hospitalized older patients delirium is associated with poor outcomes, we evaluated the effectiveness of a multicomponent strategy for the prevention of delirium. We studied 852 patients 70 years of age or older who had been admitted to the general-medicine service at a teaching hospital. Patients from one intervention unit and two usual-care units were enrolled by means of a prospective matching strategy. The intervention consisted of standardized protocols for the management of six risk factors for delirium: cognitive impairment, sleep deprivation, immobility, visual impairment, hearing impairment, and dehydration. Delirium, the primary outcome, was assessed daily until discharge. Delirium developed in 9.9 percent of the intervention group as compared with 15.0 percent of the usual-care group, (matched odds ratio, 0.60; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.39 to 0.92). The total number of days with delirium (105 vs. 161, P=0.02) and the total number of episodes (62 vs. 90, P=0.03) were significantly lower in the intervention group. However, the severity of delirium and recurrence rates were not significantly different. The overall rate of adherence to the intervention was 87 percent, and the total number of targeted risk factors per patient was significantly reduced. Intervention was associated with significant improvement in the degree of cognitive impairment among patients with cognitive impairment at admission and a reduction in the rate of use of sleep medications among all patients. Among the other risk factors per patient there were trends toward improvement in immobility, visual impairment, and hearing impairment. The risk-factor intervention strategy that we studied resulted in significant reductions in the number and duration of episodes of delirium in hospitalized older patients. The intervention had no significant effect on the severity of delirium or on recurrence rates; this finding suggests that primary prevention of delirium is probably the most effective treatment strategy.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Meg.Sands@unsw.edu.au
                Journal
                BMC Cancer
                BMC Cancer
                BMC Cancer
                BioMed Central (London )
                1471-2407
                18 January 2021
                18 January 2021
                2021
                : 21
                : 75
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.1005.4, ISNI 0000 0004 4902 0432, University of New South Wales, Prince of Wales Clinical School, ; Sydney, NSW Australia
                [2 ]GRID grid.415193.b, Department of Palliative and Supportive Care, Nelune Comprehensive Cancer Centre, , Prince of Wales Hospital and Community Health Service, ; Randwick, NSW 2031 Australia
                [3 ]GRID grid.410556.3, ISNI 0000 0001 0440 1440, Psychological Medicine Centre, , Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, ; Oxford, UK
                [4 ]GRID grid.414685.a, ISNI 0000 0004 0392 3935, Concord Cancer Centre, , Concord Repatriation General Hospital, ; Sydney, NSW Australia
                [5 ]GRID grid.1005.4, ISNI 0000 0004 4902 0432, Centre for Big Data Research in Health, , University of New South Wales, ; Sydney, NSW Australia
                [6 ]GRID grid.413206.2, ISNI 0000 0004 0624 0515, Gosford Hospital, ; Gosford, NSW Australia
                [7 ]GRID grid.117476.2, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 7611, Centre of Cardiovascular and Chronic Care, , University of Technology Sydney Faculty of Health, ; Ultimo, Australia
                [8 ]GRID grid.1013.3, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 834X, Sydney Medical School, , University of Sydney, ; Sydney, NSW Australia
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1154-9037
                Article
                7504
                10.1186/s12885-020-07504-x
                7814717
                33461523
                2d6c66bf-9353-495c-8e62-8a7e50564520
                © The Author(s) 2021

                Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 8 May 2020
                : 7 October 2020
                Categories
                Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2021

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                delirium,detection,screening,oncology,cancer,hospital
                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                delirium, detection, screening, oncology, cancer, hospital

                Comments

                Comment on this article