Format

Send to

Choose Destination
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018 Sep 10;18(1):92. doi: 10.1186/s12874-018-0552-4.

Harmonization of delirium severity instruments: a comparison of the DRS-R-98, MDAS, and CAM-S using item response theory.

Author information

1
Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 2024 E. Monument Street, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA. agross14@jhu.edu.
2
Johns Hopkins University Center on Aging and Health, Baltimore, MD, USA. agross14@jhu.edu.
3
Departments of Psychiatry and Human Behavior and Neurology, Warren Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA.
4
Aging Brain Center, Institute for Aging Research, Hebrew SeniorLife, Boston, MA, USA.
5
Department of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
6
Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

This study aimed to describe the level of agreement of three commonly used delirium instruments: the Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98 (DRS-R-98), Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale (MDAS), and Confusion Assessment Method-Severity (CAM-S).

METHODS:

We used data from a prospective clinical research study, in which a team of trained lay interviewers administered each instrument along with supporting interview and cognitive assessments in the same group of patients daily while in the hospital (N = 352). We used item response theory methods to co-calibrate the instruments.

RESULTS:

The latent traits underlying the three measures, capturing the severity of a delirium assessment, had a high degree of correlation (r's > .82). Unidimensional factor models fit well, facilitating co-calibration of the instruments. Across instruments, the less intense symptoms were generally items reflecting cognitive impairment. Although the intensity of delirium severity for most in the sample was relatively low, many of the item thresholds for the delirium severity scales are high (i.e., in the more severe range of the latent ability distribution). This indicates that even people with severe delirium may have a low probability of endorsing the highest severity categories for many items. Co-calibration enabled us to derive crosswalks to map delirium severity scores among the delirium instruments.

CONCLUSION:

These delirium instruments measure the same underlying construct of delirium severity. Relative locations of items may inform design of refined measurement instruments. Mapping of overall delirium severity scores across the delirium severity instruments enabled us to derive crosswalks, which allow scores to be translated across instruments, facilitating comparison and combination of delirium studies for integrative analysis.

KEYWORDS:

Delirium; Elderly; Item response theory; Psychometrics; Severity

PMID:
30200896
PMCID:
PMC6131747
DOI:
10.1186/s12874-018-0552-4
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for BioMed Central Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center