Concordance between DSM-IV and DSM-5 criteria for delirium diagnosis in a pooled database of 768 prospectively evaluated patients using the delirium rating scale-revised-98.
posted on 2023-02-22, 15:55authored byDAVID MEAGHERDAVID MEAGHER, Alessandro Morandi, Sharon K. Inouye, Wes Ely, Dimitrios Adamis, Alasdair M. MacLullich, James L. Rudolph, Karin Neufeld, Maeve Leonard, Giuseppe Bellelli, Daniel H.J. Davis, Andrew Teodorczuk, Stefan Kreisel, Christine Thomas, Wolfgang Hasemann, Suzanne Timmons, Niamh A. O'Regan, Sandeep Grover, Faiza Jabbar, Walter Cullen, Colum P. DunneColum P. Dunne, Barbara Kamholz, Barbara C. Van Munster, Sophia E.J.A. de Rooij, Jos F.M. de Jonghe, Paula T. Trzepacz
Background: The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual fifth edition (DSM-5) provides new criteria for delirium
diagnosis. We examined delirium diagnosis using these new criteria compared with the Diagnostic and Statistical
Manual fourth edition (DSM-IV) in a large dataset of patients assessed for delirium and related presentations.
Methods: Patient data (n = 768) from six prospectively collected cohorts, clinically assessed using DSM-IV and the
Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98 (DRS-R98), were pooled. Post hoc application of DRS-R98 item scores were used to
rate DSM-5 criteria. ‘Strict’ and ‘relaxed’ DSM-5 criteria to ascertain delirium were compared to rates determined by
DSM-IV.
Results: Using DSM-IV by clinical assessment, delirium was found in 510/768 patients (66%). Strict DSM-5 criteria
categorized 158 as delirious including 155 (30%) with DSM-IV delirium, whereas relaxed DSM-5 criteria identified
466 as delirious, including 455 (89%) diagnosed by DSM-IV (P <0.001). The concordance between the different
diagnostic methods was: 53% (ĸ = 0.22) between DSM-IV and the strict DSM-5, 91% (ĸ = 0.82) between the DSM-IV
and relaxed DSM-5 criteria and 60% (ĸ = 0.29) between the strict versus relaxed DSM-5 criteria. Only 155 cases were
identified as delirium by all three approaches. The 55 (11%) patients with DSM-IV delirium who were not rated as
delirious by relaxed criteria had lower mean DRS-R98 total scores than those rated as delirious (13.7 ± 3.9 versus
23.7 ± 6.0; P <0.001). Conversely, mean DRS-R98 score (21.1 ± 6.4) for the 70% not rated as delirious by strict DSM-5
criteria was consistent with suggested cutoff scores for full syndromal delirium. Only 11 cases met DSM-5 criteria
that were not deemed to have DSM-IV delirium.
Conclusions: The concordance between DSM-IV and the new DSM-5 delirium criteria varies considerably
depending on the interpretation of criteria. Overly-strict adherence for some new text details in DSM-5 criteria
would reduce the number of delirium cases diagnosed; however, a more ‘relaxed’ approach renders DSM-5 criteria
comparable to DSM-IV with minimal impact on their actual application and is thus recommended
History
Publication
BMC Medicine;12: 164
Publisher
BioMed Central
Note
peer-reviewed
Language
English
Also affiliated with
4i - Centre for Interventions in Infection, Inflammation & Immunity