Mansutti Irene, Muzzana Chiara, Vater Vanessa, Dettwiler Pia Urfer, Palese Alvisa, Ausserhofer Dietmar, Hasemann Wolfgang
Nursing Science, Department of Medicine, University of Udine, Udine, Italy.
Claudiana Research, College of Healthcare-Professions Claudiana, Bolzano-Bozen, Italy.
Eur Geriatr Med. 2025 Jun 28. doi: 10.1007/s41999-025-01250-8.
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.
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.
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.
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.
由于与痴呆症症状重叠、工作人员培训有限以及评估工具的差异,在养老院(NH)和长期护理(LTC)机构中识别谵妄仍然具有挑战性。本范围综述旨在确定用于这些环境中研究目的的谵妄检测工具及其特性。
该方法以Arksey和O'Malley以及Levac等人的方法为指导。检索了Medline、Embase、CINAHL、PsycINFO、Cochrane系统评价数据库和Cochrane对照试验中央注册库中的原始研究。
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,其中最常用的是完整版混乱评估法(43.1%)、Neelon和Champagne混乱量表(10.3%)、养老院混乱评估法(10.3%)、简短版混乱评估法及其修订版(8.6%)、谵妄指数(6.8%)、谵妄评定量表修订版98(6.8%)和4A测试(5.1%)。只有14种工具在NH/LTC环境中进行了有效性和可靠性测试,其中谵妄观察筛查量表显示出最高的诊断准确性。十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上显示出完全一致。临时谵妄诊断工具(DDT-Pro)所需项目不超过三项。
本综述强调了NH/LTC环境中缺乏标准化的谵妄检测。未来的研究应专注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日常护理作为谵妄预防和管理的一部分,以及培训NH/LTC工作人员。