The validity and reliability of the portuguese versions of three tools used to diagnose delirium in critically ill patients

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Gusmao-Flores, Dimitri
Data de Publicação: 2011
Outros Autores: Salluh, Jorge Ibrain Figueira, Dal-Pizzol, Felipe, Ritter, Cristiane, Tomasi, Cristiane Damiani, Lima, Marco Antônio Sales Dantas de, Santana, Lauro Reis, Lins, Rita Márcia Pacheco, Lemos, Patrícia Pimenta, Serpa, Gisele Vasconcelos, Oliveira, Jenisson, Chalhub, Ricardo Ávila, Pitrowsky, Melissa Tassano, Lacerda, Acioly L.T, Koenen, Karestan C, Quarantini, Lucas C
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Clinics
Texto Completo: https://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/19391
Resumo: OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study are to compare the sensitivity and specificity of three diagnostic tools for delirium (the Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist, the Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Units and the Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Units Flowsheet) in a mixed population of critically ill patients, and to validate the Brazilian Portuguese Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Units. METHODS: The study was conducted in four intensive care units in Brazil. Patients were screened for delirium by a psychiatrist or neurologist using the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Patients were subsequently screened by an intensivist using Portuguese translations of the three tools. RESULTS: One hundred and nineteen patients were evaluated and 38.6% were diagnosed with delirium by the reference rater. The Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Units had a sensitivity of 72.5% and a specificity of 96.2%; the Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Units Flowsheet had a sensitivity of 72.5% and a specificity of 96.2%; the Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist had a sensitivity of 96.0% and a specificity of 72.4%. There was strong agreement between the Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Units and the Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Units Flowsheet (kappa coefficient = 0.96) CONCLUSION: All three instruments are effective diagnostic tools in critically ill intensive care unit patients. In addition, the Brazilian Portuguese version of the Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Units is a valid and reliable instrument for the assessment of delirium among critically ill patients.
id USP-19_b530b017e71d2b81efa3e5ef019d470d
oai_identifier_str oai:revistas.usp.br:article/19391
network_acronym_str USP-19
network_name_str Clinics
repository_id_str
spelling The validity and reliability of the portuguese versions of three tools used to diagnose delirium in critically ill patients CAM-ICUICDSCCAM-ICU FlowsheetCritical careDelirium OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study are to compare the sensitivity and specificity of three diagnostic tools for delirium (the Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist, the Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Units and the Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Units Flowsheet) in a mixed population of critically ill patients, and to validate the Brazilian Portuguese Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Units. METHODS: The study was conducted in four intensive care units in Brazil. Patients were screened for delirium by a psychiatrist or neurologist using the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Patients were subsequently screened by an intensivist using Portuguese translations of the three tools. RESULTS: One hundred and nineteen patients were evaluated and 38.6% were diagnosed with delirium by the reference rater. The Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Units had a sensitivity of 72.5% and a specificity of 96.2%; the Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Units Flowsheet had a sensitivity of 72.5% and a specificity of 96.2%; the Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist had a sensitivity of 96.0% and a specificity of 72.4%. There was strong agreement between the Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Units and the Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Units Flowsheet (kappa coefficient = 0.96) CONCLUSION: All three instruments are effective diagnostic tools in critically ill intensive care unit patients. In addition, the Brazilian Portuguese version of the Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Units is a valid and reliable instrument for the assessment of delirium among critically ill patients. Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo2011-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/1939110.1590/S1807-59322011001100011Clinics; Vol. 66 No. 11 (2011); 1917-1922 Clinics; v. 66 n. 11 (2011); 1917-1922 Clinics; Vol. 66 Núm. 11 (2011); 1917-1922 1980-53221807-5932reponame:Clinicsinstname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)instacron:USPenghttps://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/19391/21454Gusmao-Flores, DimitriSalluh, Jorge Ibrain FigueiraDal-Pizzol, FelipeRitter, CristianeTomasi, Cristiane DamianiLima, Marco Antônio Sales Dantas deSantana, Lauro ReisLins, Rita Márcia PachecoLemos, Patrícia PimentaSerpa, Gisele VasconcelosOliveira, JenissonChalhub, Ricardo ÁvilaPitrowsky, Melissa TassanoLacerda, Acioly L.TKoenen, Karestan CQuarantini, Lucas Cinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2012-05-23T16:37:51Zoai:revistas.usp.br:article/19391Revistahttps://www.revistas.usp.br/clinicsPUBhttps://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/oai||clinics@hc.fm.usp.br1980-53221807-5932opendoar:2012-05-23T16:37:51Clinics - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv The validity and reliability of the portuguese versions of three tools used to diagnose delirium in critically ill patients
title The validity and reliability of the portuguese versions of three tools used to diagnose delirium in critically ill patients
spellingShingle The validity and reliability of the portuguese versions of three tools used to diagnose delirium in critically ill patients
Gusmao-Flores, Dimitri
CAM-ICU
ICDSC
CAM-ICU Flowsheet
Critical care
Delirium
title_short The validity and reliability of the portuguese versions of three tools used to diagnose delirium in critically ill patients
title_full The validity and reliability of the portuguese versions of three tools used to diagnose delirium in critically ill patients
title_fullStr The validity and reliability of the portuguese versions of three tools used to diagnose delirium in critically ill patients
title_full_unstemmed The validity and reliability of the portuguese versions of three tools used to diagnose delirium in critically ill patients
title_sort The validity and reliability of the portuguese versions of three tools used to diagnose delirium in critically ill patients
author Gusmao-Flores, Dimitri
author_facet Gusmao-Flores, Dimitri
Salluh, Jorge Ibrain Figueira
Dal-Pizzol, Felipe
Ritter, Cristiane
Tomasi, Cristiane Damiani
Lima, Marco Antônio Sales Dantas de
Santana, Lauro Reis
Lins, Rita Márcia Pacheco
Lemos, Patrícia Pimenta
Serpa, Gisele Vasconcelos
Oliveira, Jenisson
Chalhub, Ricardo Ávila
Pitrowsky, Melissa Tassano
Lacerda, Acioly L.T
Koenen, Karestan C
Quarantini, Lucas C
author_role author
author2 Salluh, Jorge Ibrain Figueira
Dal-Pizzol, Felipe
Ritter, Cristiane
Tomasi, Cristiane Damiani
Lima, Marco Antônio Sales Dantas de
Santana, Lauro Reis
Lins, Rita Márcia Pacheco
Lemos, Patrícia Pimenta
Serpa, Gisele Vasconcelos
Oliveira, Jenisson
Chalhub, Ricardo Ávila
Pitrowsky, Melissa Tassano
Lacerda, Acioly L.T
Koenen, Karestan C
Quarantini, Lucas C
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Gusmao-Flores, Dimitri
Salluh, Jorge Ibrain Figueira
Dal-Pizzol, Felipe
Ritter, Cristiane
Tomasi, Cristiane Damiani
Lima, Marco Antônio Sales Dantas de
Santana, Lauro Reis
Lins, Rita Márcia Pacheco
Lemos, Patrícia Pimenta
Serpa, Gisele Vasconcelos
Oliveira, Jenisson
Chalhub, Ricardo Ávila
Pitrowsky, Melissa Tassano
Lacerda, Acioly L.T
Koenen, Karestan C
Quarantini, Lucas C
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv CAM-ICU
ICDSC
CAM-ICU Flowsheet
Critical care
Delirium
topic CAM-ICU
ICDSC
CAM-ICU Flowsheet
Critical care
Delirium
description OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study are to compare the sensitivity and specificity of three diagnostic tools for delirium (the Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist, the Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Units and the Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Units Flowsheet) in a mixed population of critically ill patients, and to validate the Brazilian Portuguese Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Units. METHODS: The study was conducted in four intensive care units in Brazil. Patients were screened for delirium by a psychiatrist or neurologist using the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Patients were subsequently screened by an intensivist using Portuguese translations of the three tools. RESULTS: One hundred and nineteen patients were evaluated and 38.6% were diagnosed with delirium by the reference rater. The Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Units had a sensitivity of 72.5% and a specificity of 96.2%; the Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Units Flowsheet had a sensitivity of 72.5% and a specificity of 96.2%; the Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist had a sensitivity of 96.0% and a specificity of 72.4%. There was strong agreement between the Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Units and the Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Units Flowsheet (kappa coefficient = 0.96) CONCLUSION: All three instruments are effective diagnostic tools in critically ill intensive care unit patients. In addition, the Brazilian Portuguese version of the Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Units is a valid and reliable instrument for the assessment of delirium among critically ill patients.
publishDate 2011
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2011-01-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/19391
10.1590/S1807-59322011001100011
url https://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/19391
identifier_str_mv 10.1590/S1807-59322011001100011
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/19391/21454
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Clinics; Vol. 66 No. 11 (2011); 1917-1922
Clinics; v. 66 n. 11 (2011); 1917-1922
Clinics; Vol. 66 Núm. 11 (2011); 1917-1922
1980-5322
1807-5932
reponame:Clinics
instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
instacron:USP
instname_str Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
instacron_str USP
institution USP
reponame_str Clinics
collection Clinics
repository.name.fl_str_mv Clinics - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||clinics@hc.fm.usp.br
_version_ 1800222756878417920