The 4 ‘A’s test for detecting delirium in acute medical patients: a diagnostic accuracy study

Background: Delirium is a common and serious neuropsychiatric syndrome, usually triggered by illness or drugs. It remains underdetected. One reason for this is a lack of brief, pragmatic assessment tools. The 4 ‘A’s test (Arousal, Attention, Abbreviated Mental Test – 4, Acute change) (4AT) is a scre...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Alasdair MJ MacLullich, Susan D Shenkin, Steve Goodacre, Mary Godfrey, Janet Hanley, Antaine Stíobhairt, Elizabeth Lavender, Julia Boyd, Jacqueline Stephen, Christopher Weir, Allan MacRaild, Jill Steven, Polly Black, Katharina Diernberger, Peter Hall, Zoë Tieges, Christopher Fox, Atul Anand, John Young, Najma Siddiqi, Alasdair Gray
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: NIHR Journals Library 2019-08-01
Series:Health Technology Assessment
Subjects:
4AT
CAM
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.3310/hta23400
id doaj-b8957fe571df4354b049a2f59e6b82e5
record_format Article
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Alasdair MJ MacLullich
Susan D Shenkin
Steve Goodacre
Mary Godfrey
Janet Hanley
Antaine Stíobhairt
Elizabeth Lavender
Julia Boyd
Jacqueline Stephen
Christopher Weir
Allan MacRaild
Jill Steven
Polly Black
Katharina Diernberger
Peter Hall
Zoë Tieges
Christopher Fox
Atul Anand
John Young
Najma Siddiqi
Alasdair Gray
spellingShingle Alasdair MJ MacLullich
Susan D Shenkin
Steve Goodacre
Mary Godfrey
Janet Hanley
Antaine Stíobhairt
Elizabeth Lavender
Julia Boyd
Jacqueline Stephen
Christopher Weir
Allan MacRaild
Jill Steven
Polly Black
Katharina Diernberger
Peter Hall
Zoë Tieges
Christopher Fox
Atul Anand
John Young
Najma Siddiqi
Alasdair Gray
The 4 ‘A’s test for detecting delirium in acute medical patients: a diagnostic accuracy study
Health Technology Assessment
DELIRIUM
DEMENTIA
ACUTE HOSPITALS
4AT
DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY
CAM
author_facet Alasdair MJ MacLullich
Susan D Shenkin
Steve Goodacre
Mary Godfrey
Janet Hanley
Antaine Stíobhairt
Elizabeth Lavender
Julia Boyd
Jacqueline Stephen
Christopher Weir
Allan MacRaild
Jill Steven
Polly Black
Katharina Diernberger
Peter Hall
Zoë Tieges
Christopher Fox
Atul Anand
John Young
Najma Siddiqi
Alasdair Gray
author_sort Alasdair MJ MacLullich
title The 4 ‘A’s test for detecting delirium in acute medical patients: a diagnostic accuracy study
title_short The 4 ‘A’s test for detecting delirium in acute medical patients: a diagnostic accuracy study
title_full The 4 ‘A’s test for detecting delirium in acute medical patients: a diagnostic accuracy study
title_fullStr The 4 ‘A’s test for detecting delirium in acute medical patients: a diagnostic accuracy study
title_full_unstemmed The 4 ‘A’s test for detecting delirium in acute medical patients: a diagnostic accuracy study
title_sort 4 ‘a’s test for detecting delirium in acute medical patients: a diagnostic accuracy study
publisher NIHR Journals Library
series Health Technology Assessment
issn 1366-5278
2046-4924
publishDate 2019-08-01
description Background: Delirium is a common and serious neuropsychiatric syndrome, usually triggered by illness or drugs. It remains underdetected. One reason for this is a lack of brief, pragmatic assessment tools. The 4 ‘A’s test (Arousal, Attention, Abbreviated Mental Test – 4, Acute change) (4AT) is a screening tool designed for routine use. This project evaluated its usability, diagnostic accuracy and cost. Methods: Phase 1 – the usability of the 4AT in routine practice was measured with two surveys and two qualitative studies of health-care professionals, and a review of current clinical use of the 4AT as well as its presence in guidelines and reports. Phase 2 – the 4AT’s diagnostic accuracy was assessed in newly admitted acute medical patients aged ≥ 70 years. Its performance was compared with that of the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM; a longer screening tool). The performance of individual 4AT test items was related to cognitive status, length of stay, new institutionalisation, mortality at 12 weeks and outcomes. The method used was a prospective, double-blind diagnostic test accuracy study in emergency departments or in acute general medical wards in three UK sites. Each patient underwent a reference standard delirium assessment and was also randomised to receive an assessment with either the 4AT (n = 421) or the CAM (n = 420). A health economics analysis was also conducted. Results: Phase 1 found evidence that delirium awareness is increasing, but also that there is a need for education on delirium in general and on the 4AT in particular. Most users reported that the 4AT was useful, and it was in widespread use both in the UK and beyond. No changes to the 4AT were considered necessary. Phase 2 involved 785 individuals who had data for analysis; their mean age was 81.4 (standard deviation 6.4) years, 45% were male, 99% were white and 9% had a known dementia diagnosis. The 4AT (n = 392) had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.90. A positive 4AT score (> 3) had a specificity of 95% [95% confidence interval (CI) 92% to 97%] and a sensitivity of 76% (95% CI 61% to 87%) for reference standard delirium. The CAM (n = 382) had a specificity of 100% (95% CI 98% to 100%) and a sensitivity of 40% (95% CI 26% to 57%) in the subset of participants whom it was possible to assess using this. Patients with positive 4AT scores had longer lengths of stay (median 5 days, interquartile range 2.0–14.0 days) than did those with negative 4AT scores (median 2 days, interquartile range 1.0–6.0 days), and they had a higher 12-week mortality rate (16.1% and 9.2%, respectively). The estimated 12-week costs of an initial inpatient stay for patients with delirium were more than double the costs of an inpatient stay for patients without delirium (e.g. in Scotland, £7559, 95% CI £7362 to £7755, vs. £4215, 95% CI £4175 to £4254). The estimated cost of false-positive cases was £4653, of false-negative cases was £8956, and of a missed diagnosis was £2067. Limitations: Patients were aged ≥ 70 years and were assessed soon after they were admitted, limiting generalisability. The treatment of patients in accordance with reference standard diagnosis limited the ability to assess comparative cost-effectiveness. Conclusions: These findings support the use of the 4AT as a rapid delirium assessment instrument. The 4AT has acceptable diagnostic accuracy for acute older patients aged > 70 years. Future work: Further research should address the real-world implementation of delirium assessment. The 4AT should be tested in other populations. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN53388093. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 40. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. The funder specified that any new delirium assessment tool should be compared against the CAM, but had no other role in the study design or conduct of the study.
topic DELIRIUM
DEMENTIA
ACUTE HOSPITALS
4AT
DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY
CAM
url https://doi.org/10.3310/hta23400
work_keys_str_mv AT alasdairmjmaclullich the4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT susandshenkin the4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT stevegoodacre the4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT marygodfrey the4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT janethanley the4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT antainestiobhairt the4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT elizabethlavender the4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT juliaboyd the4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT jacquelinestephen the4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT christopherweir the4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT allanmacraild the4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT jillsteven the4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT pollyblack the4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT katharinadiernberger the4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT peterhall the4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT zoetieges the4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT christopherfox the4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT atulanand the4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT johnyoung the4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT najmasiddiqi the4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT alasdairgray the4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT alasdairmjmaclullich 4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT susandshenkin 4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT stevegoodacre 4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT marygodfrey 4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT janethanley 4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT antainestiobhairt 4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT elizabethlavender 4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT juliaboyd 4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT jacquelinestephen 4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT christopherweir 4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT allanmacraild 4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT jillsteven 4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT pollyblack 4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT katharinadiernberger 4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT peterhall 4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT zoetieges 4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT christopherfox 4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT atulanand 4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT johnyoung 4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT najmasiddiqi 4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
AT alasdairgray 4astestfordetectingdeliriuminacutemedicalpatientsadiagnosticaccuracystudy
_version_ 1724974987590238208
spelling doaj-b8957fe571df4354b049a2f59e6b82e52020-11-25T01:57:18ZengNIHR Journals LibraryHealth Technology Assessment1366-52782046-49242019-08-01234010.3310/hta2340011/143/01The 4 ‘A’s test for detecting delirium in acute medical patients: a diagnostic accuracy studyAlasdair MJ MacLullich0Susan D Shenkin1Steve Goodacre2Mary Godfrey3Janet Hanley4Antaine Stíobhairt5Elizabeth Lavender6Julia Boyd7Jacqueline Stephen8Christopher Weir9Allan MacRaild10Jill Steven11Polly Black12Katharina Diernberger13Peter Hall14Zoë Tieges15Christopher Fox16Atul Anand17John Young18Najma Siddiqi19Alasdair Gray20Geriatric Medicine, Division of Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UKGeriatric Medicine, Division of Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UKEmergency Medicine, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UKHealth and Social Care, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, School of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, UKSchool of Health and Social Care, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, UKGeriatric Medicine, Division of Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UKHealth and Social Care, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, School of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, UKEdinburgh Clinical Trials Unit, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UKEdinburgh Clinical Trials Unit, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UKEdinburgh Clinical Trials Unit, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UKEmergency Medicine Research Group (EMERGE), NHS Lothian, Edinburgh, UKEmergency Medicine Research Group (EMERGE), NHS Lothian, Edinburgh, UKEmergency Medicine Research Group (EMERGE), NHS Lothian, Edinburgh, UKUsher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UKEdinburgh Clinical Trials Unit, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UKGeriatric Medicine, Division of Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UKNorwich Medical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UKGeriatric Medicine, Division of Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UKBradford Institute for Health Research, Bradford Royal Infirmary, Bradford, UKPsychiatry, University of York, YorkUsher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UKBackground: Delirium is a common and serious neuropsychiatric syndrome, usually triggered by illness or drugs. It remains underdetected. One reason for this is a lack of brief, pragmatic assessment tools. The 4 ‘A’s test (Arousal, Attention, Abbreviated Mental Test – 4, Acute change) (4AT) is a screening tool designed for routine use. This project evaluated its usability, diagnostic accuracy and cost. Methods: Phase 1 – the usability of the 4AT in routine practice was measured with two surveys and two qualitative studies of health-care professionals, and a review of current clinical use of the 4AT as well as its presence in guidelines and reports. Phase 2 – the 4AT’s diagnostic accuracy was assessed in newly admitted acute medical patients aged ≥ 70 years. Its performance was compared with that of the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM; a longer screening tool). The performance of individual 4AT test items was related to cognitive status, length of stay, new institutionalisation, mortality at 12 weeks and outcomes. The method used was a prospective, double-blind diagnostic test accuracy study in emergency departments or in acute general medical wards in three UK sites. Each patient underwent a reference standard delirium assessment and was also randomised to receive an assessment with either the 4AT (n = 421) or the CAM (n = 420). A health economics analysis was also conducted. Results: Phase 1 found evidence that delirium awareness is increasing, but also that there is a need for education on delirium in general and on the 4AT in particular. Most users reported that the 4AT was useful, and it was in widespread use both in the UK and beyond. No changes to the 4AT were considered necessary. Phase 2 involved 785 individuals who had data for analysis; their mean age was 81.4 (standard deviation 6.4) years, 45% were male, 99% were white and 9% had a known dementia diagnosis. The 4AT (n = 392) had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.90. A positive 4AT score (> 3) had a specificity of 95% [95% confidence interval (CI) 92% to 97%] and a sensitivity of 76% (95% CI 61% to 87%) for reference standard delirium. The CAM (n = 382) had a specificity of 100% (95% CI 98% to 100%) and a sensitivity of 40% (95% CI 26% to 57%) in the subset of participants whom it was possible to assess using this. Patients with positive 4AT scores had longer lengths of stay (median 5 days, interquartile range 2.0–14.0 days) than did those with negative 4AT scores (median 2 days, interquartile range 1.0–6.0 days), and they had a higher 12-week mortality rate (16.1% and 9.2%, respectively). The estimated 12-week costs of an initial inpatient stay for patients with delirium were more than double the costs of an inpatient stay for patients without delirium (e.g. in Scotland, £7559, 95% CI £7362 to £7755, vs. £4215, 95% CI £4175 to £4254). The estimated cost of false-positive cases was £4653, of false-negative cases was £8956, and of a missed diagnosis was £2067. Limitations: Patients were aged ≥ 70 years and were assessed soon after they were admitted, limiting generalisability. The treatment of patients in accordance with reference standard diagnosis limited the ability to assess comparative cost-effectiveness. Conclusions: These findings support the use of the 4AT as a rapid delirium assessment instrument. The 4AT has acceptable diagnostic accuracy for acute older patients aged > 70 years. Future work: Further research should address the real-world implementation of delirium assessment. The 4AT should be tested in other populations. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN53388093. Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 40. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. The funder specified that any new delirium assessment tool should be compared against the CAM, but had no other role in the study design or conduct of the study.https://doi.org/10.3310/hta23400DELIRIUMDEMENTIAACUTE HOSPITALS4ATDIAGNOSTIC ACCURACYCAM