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
. 2023 Oct;45(5):1128-1135.
doi: 10.1007/s11096-023-01641-6. Epub 2023 Sep 15.

External validity of an automated delirium prediction model (DEMO) and comparison to the manual VMS-questions: a retrospective cohort study

Affiliations

External validity of an automated delirium prediction model (DEMO) and comparison to the manual VMS-questions: a retrospective cohort study

Ma Ida Mohmaed Ali et al. Int J Clin Pharm. 2023 Oct.

Abstract

Background: It is estimated that one-third of delirium cases in hospitals could be prevented with appropriate interventions. In Dutch hospitals a manual instrument (VMS-questions) is used to identify patients at-risk for delirium. Delirium Model (DEMO) is an automated model which could support delirium prevention more efficiently. However, it has not been validated beyond the hospital it was developed in.

Aim: To externally validate the DEMO and compare its performance to the VMS-questions.

Method: A retrospective cohort study between July and December 2018 was conducted. Delirium cases were identified through a chart review, and the VMS-questions were extracted from the electronic health records. The DEMO was validated in patients ≥ 60 years, and a comparison with the VMS-questions was made in patients ≥ 70 years.

Results: In total 1,345 admissions were included. The DEMO predicted 59 out of 75 delirium cases (sensitivity 0.79, 95% CI = 0.68-0.87; specificity 0.75, 95% CI = 0.72-0.77). Compared to the VMS-questions, the DEMO showed a lower specificity (0.64 vs. 0.72; p < 0.001) and a comparable sensitivity (0.83 vs. 0.80; p = 0.56). The VMS-questions were missing in 20% of admissions, in which the DEMO correctly predicted 10 of 12 delirium cases.

Conclusion: The DEMO showed acceptable performance for delirium prediction. Overall the DEMO predicted more delirium cases because the VMS-questions were missing in 20% of admissions. This study shows that automated instruments such as DEMO could play a key role in the efficient and timely deployment of measures to prevent delirium.

Keywords: Automated model; Delirium; External validation; Hospitalized patients; Prevention measures; Risk prediction.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Davoudi A, Ebadi A, Rashidi P, et al. Delirium prediction using machine learning models on preoperative electronic health records data. Proc IEEE Int Symp Bioinformatics Bioeng. 2017;2017:568–73. https://doi.org/10.1109/BIBE.2017.00014 . - DOI - PubMed
    1. Siddiqi N, House AO, Holmes JD. Occurrence and outcome of delirium in medical in-patients: a systematic literature review. Age Ageing. 2006;35(4):350–64. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afl005 . - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hapca S, Guthrie B, Cvoro V, et al. Mortality in people with dementia, delirium, and unspecified cognitive impairment in the general hospital: prospective cohort study of 6,724 patients with 2 years follow-up. Clin Epidemiol. 2018;10:1743–53. https://doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S174807 . - DOI - PubMed - PMC
    1. Inouye SK, Westendorp RG, Saczynski JS. Delirium in elderly people. Lancet. 2014;383(9920):911–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60688-1 . - DOI - PubMed
    1. Salluh JI, Wang H, Schneider EB, et al. Outcome of delirium in critically ill patients: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2015;350:h2538. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h2538 . - DOI - PubMed - PMC

LinkOut - more resources