疗养院和长期护理机构的谵妄:检测工具的范围审查结果。

IF 3.6 3区 医学 Q2 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY
Irene Mansutti, Chiara Muzzana, Vanessa Vater, Pia Urfer Dettwiler, Alvisa Palese, Dietmar Ausserhofer, Wolfgang Hasemann
{"title":"疗养院和长期护理机构的谵妄:检测工具的范围审查结果。","authors":"Irene Mansutti, Chiara Muzzana, Vanessa Vater, Pia Urfer Dettwiler, Alvisa Palese, Dietmar Ausserhofer, Wolfgang Hasemann","doi":"10.1007/s41999-025-01250-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The detection of delirium among residents in nursing homes (NH) and long-term care (LTC) facilities remains challenging due to overlapping symptoms with dementia, limited staff training, and variability in assessment tools. This scoping review aimed to identify delirium detection tools and their properties as used for research purposes in these settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The methodology was guided by Arksey and O'Malley and Levac et al. Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for original research studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 58 studies met the inclusion criteria, with most conducted in the USA (37.9%) and Europe. We identified 25 delirium detection tools, with the Confusion Assessment Method long form (43.1%), the Neelon and Champagne Confusion Scale (10.3%), the Nursing Home Confusion Assessment Method (10.3%), the short Confusion Assessment Method and its modifications (8.6%), the Delirium Index (6.8%), the Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98 (6.8%), and the 4A's Test (5.1%) as the most frequently used. Only 14 tools have undergone validity and reliability testing in NH/LTC settings, with the Delirium Observation Screening Scale showing the highest diagnostic accuracy. Ten tools showed full concordance regarding the three delirium domains: cognitive domain, higher-level thinking domain, and circadian domain. The Delirium Diagnostic Tool-Provisional (DDT-Pro) required no more than three items.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>This review highlights the lack of standardized delirium detection in NH/LTC settings. Future research should focus on providing evidence based on validity and reliability of existing tools, integrating delirium screening and assessment into routine care as part of delirium prevention and management, and training NH/LTC staff.</p>","PeriodicalId":49287,"journal":{"name":"European Geriatric Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Delirium in nursing homes and long-term care facilities: findings of a scoping review of detection tools.\",\"authors\":\"Irene Mansutti, Chiara Muzzana, Vanessa Vater, Pia Urfer Dettwiler, Alvisa Palese, Dietmar Ausserhofer, Wolfgang Hasemann\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s41999-025-01250-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The detection of delirium among residents in nursing homes (NH) and long-term care (LTC) facilities remains challenging due to overlapping symptoms with dementia, limited staff training, and variability in assessment tools. This scoping review aimed to identify delirium detection tools and their properties as used for research purposes in these settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The methodology was guided by Arksey and O'Malley and Levac et al. Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for original research studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 58 studies met the inclusion criteria, with most conducted in the USA (37.9%) and Europe. We identified 25 delirium detection tools, with the Confusion Assessment Method long form (43.1%), the Neelon and Champagne Confusion Scale (10.3%), the Nursing Home Confusion Assessment Method (10.3%), the short Confusion Assessment Method and its modifications (8.6%), the Delirium Index (6.8%), the Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98 (6.8%), and the 4A's Test (5.1%) as the most frequently used. Only 14 tools have undergone validity and reliability testing in NH/LTC settings, with the Delirium Observation Screening Scale showing the highest diagnostic accuracy. Ten tools showed full concordance regarding the three delirium domains: cognitive domain, higher-level thinking domain, and circadian domain. The Delirium Diagnostic Tool-Provisional (DDT-Pro) required no more than three items.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>This review highlights the lack of standardized delirium detection in NH/LTC settings. Future research should focus on providing evidence based on validity and reliability of existing tools, integrating delirium screening and assessment into routine care as part of delirium prevention and management, and training NH/LTC staff.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49287,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Geriatric Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Geriatric Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s41999-025-01250-8\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Geriatric Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s41999-025-01250-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在养老院(NH)和长期护理机构(LTC)的居民中检测谵妄仍然具有挑战性,因为症状与痴呆重叠,工作人员培训有限,以及评估工具的可变性。这一范围审查旨在确定谵妄检测工具和他们的性质,用于研究目的在这些设置。方法:方法学以Arksey、O’malley和Levac等为指导。检索了Medline、Embase、CINAHL、PsycINFO、Cochrane系统评价数据库和Cochrane中央对照试验注册库等原始研究。结果:共有58项研究符合纳入标准,其中大多数在美国(37.9%)和欧洲进行。我们确定了25种谵妄检测工具,其中最常用的是混淆评估法长表(43.1%)、尼隆和香槟混淆量表(10.3%)、养老院混淆评估法(10.3%)、混淆评估法短表及其修改(8.6%)、谵妄指数(6.8%)、谵妄评定量表-修订-98(6.8%)和4A测试(5.1%)。只有14种工具在NH/LTC设置中进行了有效性和可靠性测试,其中谵妄观察筛选量表显示出最高的诊断准确性。10种工具在谵妄的三个领域:认知领域、高级思维领域和昼夜节律领域显示完全一致。谵妄诊断工具-临时(DDT-Pro)要求不超过三个项目。讨论:本综述强调了在NH/LTC环境中缺乏标准化的谵妄检测。未来的研究应侧重于基于现有工具的有效性和可靠性提供证据,将谵妄筛查和评估纳入常规护理,作为谵妄预防和管理的一部分,并培训NH/LTC工作人员。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Delirium in nursing homes and long-term care facilities: findings of a scoping review of detection tools.

Background: The detection of delirium among residents in nursing homes (NH) and long-term care (LTC) facilities remains challenging due to overlapping symptoms with dementia, limited staff training, and variability in assessment tools. This scoping review aimed to identify delirium detection tools and their properties as used for research purposes in these settings.

Methods: The methodology was guided by Arksey and O'Malley and Levac et al. Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for original research studies.

Results: A total of 58 studies met the inclusion criteria, with most conducted in the USA (37.9%) and Europe. We identified 25 delirium detection tools, with the Confusion Assessment Method long form (43.1%), the Neelon and Champagne Confusion Scale (10.3%), the Nursing Home Confusion Assessment Method (10.3%), the short Confusion Assessment Method and its modifications (8.6%), the Delirium Index (6.8%), the Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98 (6.8%), and the 4A's Test (5.1%) as the most frequently used. Only 14 tools have undergone validity and reliability testing in NH/LTC settings, with the Delirium Observation Screening Scale showing the highest diagnostic accuracy. Ten tools showed full concordance regarding the three delirium domains: cognitive domain, higher-level thinking domain, and circadian domain. The Delirium Diagnostic Tool-Provisional (DDT-Pro) required no more than three items.

Discussion: This review highlights the lack of standardized delirium detection in NH/LTC settings. Future research should focus on providing evidence based on validity and reliability of existing tools, integrating delirium screening and assessment into routine care as part of delirium prevention and management, and training NH/LTC staff.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
European Geriatric Medicine
European Geriatric Medicine GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY-
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
2.60%
发文量
114
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: European Geriatric Medicine is the official journal of the European Geriatric Medicine Society (EUGMS). Launched in 2010, this journal aims to publish the highest quality material, both scientific and clinical, on all aspects of Geriatric Medicine. The EUGMS is interested in the promotion of Geriatric Medicine in any setting (acute or subacute care, rehabilitation, nursing homes, primary care, fall clinics, ambulatory assessment, dementia clinics..), and also in functionality in old age, comprehensive geriatric assessment, geriatric syndromes, geriatric education, old age psychiatry, models of geriatric care in health services, and quality assurance.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信