Delirium in the intensive care setting: A reevaluation of the validity of the CAM–ICU and ICDSC versus the DSM–IV–TR in determining a diagnosis of delirium as part of the daily clinical routine

BACKGROUND: In the intensive care setting, delirium is a common occurrence that comes with subsequent adversities. Therefore, several instruments have been developed to screen for and detect delirium. Their validity and psychometric properties, however, remain controversial. METHOD: In this prospective cohort study, the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU) and the Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist (ICDSC) were evaluated versus the DSM-IV-TR in the diagnosis of delirium with respect to their validity and psychometric properties. RESULTS: Out of some 289 patients, 210 with matching CAM-ICU, ICDSC, and DSM-IV-TR diagnoses were included. Between the scales, the prevalence of delirium ranged from 23.3% with the CAM-ICU, to 30.5% with the ICDSC, to 43.8% with the DSM-IV-TR criteria. The CAM-ICU showed only moderate concurrent validity (Cohen's κ = 0.44) and sensitivity (50%), but high specificity (95%). The ICDSC also reached moderate agreement (Cohen's κ = 0.60) and sensitivity (63%) while being very specific (95%). Between the CAM-ICU and the ICDSC, the concurrent validity was again only moderate (Cohen's κ = 0.56); however, the ICDSC yielded higher sensitivity and specificity (78 and 83%, respectively). SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: In the daily clinical routine, neither the CAM-ICU nor the ICDSC, common tools used in screening and detecting delirium in the intensive care setting, reached sufficient concurrent validity; nor did they outperform the DSM-IV-TR diagnostic criteria with respect to sensitivity or positive prediction, but they were very specific. Thus, the non-prediction by the CAM-ICU or ICDSC did not refute the presence of delirium. Between the CAM-ICU and ICDSC, the ICDSC proved to be the more accurate instrument.