Motor symptoms in 100 patients with delirium versus control subjects: comparison of subtyping methods.

BACKGROUND: Different motor presentations of delirium may represent clinically meaningful subtypes. OBJECTIVE: Authors sought to evaluate delirium phenomena. METHOD: They used three non-validated delirium psychomotor subtype schemas, applied to a palliative-care population. Their unique items were merged to comprise a 30-item Delirium Motor Checklist (DMC) used to collect data, rate each schema, and determine subtype frequencies in 100 consecutive DSM-IV delirium patients and 52 medically-matched control subjects without delirium. The Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98 (DRS-R98) assessed delirium severity, and subtype categorization using its two motor items was compared with the scale that used the psychomotor schema. RESULTS: In delirium, motor disturbance was present in 100% by DMC versus 92% by DRS-R98 motor items; the DMC motor items also significantly distinguished delirium from control subjects. Motor subtype classification (hyperactive, hypoactive, mixed, and none) varied among the four methods, with low concordance across all four methods and 76% concordance for pairwise comparisons. The DRS-R-98 identified the most hypoactive delirium cases. CONCLUSION: Motor disturbances are common in delirium, although whether they represent clinical subtypes is confounded by methodological issues. New motor subtyping methods are needed that are validated in other medical populations, use matched control subjects, and have higher sensitivity and specificity for pure motor features.

A new data-based motor subtype schema for delirium.

The authors sought to validate a new approach to motor subtyping in delirium based on data from a controlled comparison of items from three existing psychomotor schema combined into the Delirium Motoric Checklist. Principal components analysis of the Delirium Motoric Checklist identified two factors that correlated significantly with independently assessed motor agitation and retardation. Symptoms loading at >0.65 were extracted to form subtype criteria composed of four hyperactive items and seven hypoactive items which, when applied to the delirious population, suggested a cutoff of two items for subtypes. This new scale is derived from existing approaches but is more concise, focused on motor disturbances, and validated against nondelirious comparison subjects and independently rated motor disturbance.

Phenomenology of delirium. Assessment of 100 adult cases using standardised measures.

BACKGROUND: Delirium phenomenology is understudied. AIMS: To investigate the relationship between cognitive and non-cognitive delirium symptoms and test the primacy of inattention in delirium. METHOD: People with delirium (n=100) were assessed using the Delirium Rating Scale-Revised-98 (DRS-R98) and Cognitive Test for Delirium (CTD). RESULTS: Sleep-wake cycle abnormalities and inattention were most frequent, while disorientation was the least frequent cognitive deficit. Patients with psychosis had either perceptual disturbances or delusions but not both. Neither delusions nor hallucinations were associated with cognitive impairments. Inattention was associated with severity of other cognitive disturbances but not with non-cognitive items. CTD comprehension correlated most closely with non-cognitive features of delirium. CONCLUSIONS: Delirium phenomenology is consistent with broad dysfunction of higher cortical centres, characterised in particular by inattention and sleep-wake cycle disturbance. Attention and comprehension together are the cognitive items that best account for the syndrome of delirium. Psychosis in delirium differs from that in functional psychoses.

Patient-controlled benzodiazepine dose reduction in a community mental health service.

Abstact Objectives: We report a patient-controlled benzodiazepine discontinuation programme in a generic multidisciplinary community mental health service. METHOD: A prescribing audit identified suboptimal benzodiazepine use which stimulated a discontinuation programme [prescribing policy, psychoeducation, anxiety management] to encourage benzodiazepine cessation. Benzodiazepine status was re-assessed at 12 and 24 month follow-ups. RESULTS: 158 patients were receiving benzodiazepines at study onset. At 12 month follow-up, 68 of these were still receiving benodiazepines. This was due to discontinuation (n = 32), dose reduction (n = 26) and service dropout (n = 71). Benzodiazepine status at follow-up was predicted by attendance at anxiety management sessions (p = 0.01) and shorter duration of benzodiazepine use (p = 0.005). Patients attending anxiety management sessions were 2.5 times more likely to reduce use. Discontinuation followed four patterns: (a) rapid and complete discontinuation (n = 19); (b) total discontinuation in a gradual manner (n = 13); (c) partial dose reduction without total discontinuation (n = 18) and (d) almost total discontinuation with continued low-dose use (n = 8). The patients that achieved total discontinuation were younger (p = 0.01) and in receipt of benzodiazepine agents for a shorter duration (p = 0.009). At 24 month follow-up only three patients had relapsed into benzodiazepine use and a further 13 had achieved total discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS: Many chronic benzodiazepine users can achieve lasting discontinuation with patient-controlled dose tapering. Patient refusal and service dropout are common during discontinuation programmes. Anxiety management is a valuable adjunct to discontinuation.