Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Dec 1;4(12):e2137267.
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.37267.

Evaluation of the 3-Minute Diagnostic Confusion Assessment Method for Identification of Postoperative Delirium in Older Patients

Affiliations

Evaluation of the 3-Minute Diagnostic Confusion Assessment Method for Identification of Postoperative Delirium in Older Patients

Jordan Oberhaus et al. JAMA Netw Open. .

Abstract

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.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.. Bland-Altman Plots for the 3-Minute Diagnostic Confusion Assessment Method (3D-CAM) and Long-Form CAM Instruments
Each plus sign represents 1 patient (299 total patients); dashed gray lines, 95% agreement limits; and the dashed blue line, the mean difference.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.. Bland-Altman Plots for 4 Components of the 3-Minute Diagnostic Confusion Assessment Method (3D-CAM) and Long-Form CAM Instruments
Each plus sign represents 1 patient (299 total patients); dashed gray lines, 95% agreement limits; and the dashed blue line, the mean difference. AC indicates acute change component; ALOC, altered level of consciousness component; DT, disorganized thinking component; INAT, inattention component.

References

    1. Inouye SK, Westendorp RG, Saczynski JS. Delirium in elderly people. Lancet. 2014;383(9920):911-922. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60688-1 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brown CH IV. Delirium in the cardiac surgical ICU. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2014;27(2):117-122. doi:10.1097/ACO.0000000000000061 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Saczynski JS, Marcantonio ER, Quach L, et al. . Cognitive trajectories after postoperative delirium. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(1):30-39. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1112923 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. McCusker J, Cole M, Dendukuri N, Belzile E, Primeau F. Delirium in older medical inpatients and subsequent cognitive and functional status: a prospective study. CMAJ. 2001;165(5):575-583. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Inouye SK, Rushing JT, Foreman MD, Palmer RM, Pompei P. Does delirium contribute to poor hospital outcomes? a three-site epidemiologic study. J Gen Intern Med. 1998;13(4):234-242. doi:10.1046/j.1525-1497.1998.00073.x - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types