Validity and Reliability of the Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale-Thai Version (MDAS-T) for Assessment of Delirium in Palliative Care Patients

Background

Delirium, a neuropsychiatric syndrome that occurs throughout medical illness trajectories, is frequently misdiagnosed. The Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale (MDAS) is a commonly used tool in palliative care (PC) settings. Our objective was to establish and validate the Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale-Thai version (MDAS-T) in PC patients.

Materials and Methods

The MDAS was translated into Thai. Content validity, inter-rater reliability, and internal consistency were explored. The construct validity of the MDAS-T was analyzed using exploratory factor analysis. Instrument testing of the MDAS-T, the Thai version of the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU-T), and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition as the gold standard was performed. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to determine the optimal cutoff score. The duration of each assessment was recorded.

Results

The study enrolled 194 patients. The content validity index was 0.97. The intraclass correlation coefficient and Cronbach's α coefficient were 0.98 and 0.96, respectively. A principal component analysis indicated a homogeneous, one-factor structure. The area under the ROC curve was 0.96 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.93–0.99). The best combination of sensitivity and specificity (95% CI) of the MDAS-T were 0.92 (0.85–0.96) and 0.90 (0.82–0.94), respectively, with a cutoff score of 9, whereas the CAM-ICU-T yielded 0.58 (0.48–0.67) and 0.98 (0.93–0.99), respectively. The median MDAS-T assessment time was 5 minutes.

Conclusion

This study established and validated the MDAS-T as a good and feasible tool for delirium screening and severity rating in PC settings.

Implications for Practice

Delirium is prevalent in palliative care (PC) settings and causes distress to patients and families, thereby making delirium screening necessary. This study found that the MDAS-T is a highly objective and feasible test for delirium screening and severity monitoring in PC settings and can greatly improve the quality of care for this population.

     

Evaluation of two-dimensional lateral cephalogram and three-dimensional cone beam computed tomography superimpositions: a comparative study

Superimposition of radiographic imaging is used to evaluate patient growth and the effects of surgical and/or orthodontic treatment. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of superimposition between two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) superimpositions. 2D lateral cephalograms were generated from the initial and final cone beam computed tomography scans (CBCT) of 18 patients and superimposed. Both 3D CBCT and 2D CBCT generated lateral cephalograms were oriented to the Frankfort horizontal plane and superimposed according to the American Board of Orthodontics recommendations. Changes in landmark position were quantified from the resulting superimposition outcomes via linear measurements made with Dolphin software. Differences between the two methods were analyzed using paired t-tests. Measurements were repeated twice for 10 randomly selected scans to assess reliability by intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) analysis. Intra-examiner reliability was high for all measurements (ICC > 0.84). Agreement between 2D and 3D superimposition outcomes, as measured by P-values, was low for ANS (P = 0.026), B-point (P < 0.001), ST Upper lip (P = 0.019), U1 tip (P = 0.010), and U1 apex (P = 0.026). 2D measurements were significantly higher than 3D measurements for ANS, B-point, ST Upper lip, U1 tip, and U1 apex. Findings indicated that both methods of superimposition (2D and 3D) are highly reliable. Statistical differences between 2D and 3D superimposition outcomes were below the threshold of clinical significance.     

Clinical assessment of non-suicidal self-injury: A systematic review of instruments

There has been an increase in the number of assessment instruments for non-suicidal self-injury (NSSI). However, previous reviews are inconsistent and do not provide a comprehensive psychometric assessment of the instruments. This study aimed to systematically assess and compare the psychometric properties of clinically relevant instruments to measure NSSI in any population. Through a systematic review guided by COSMIN and PRISMA, two searches were conducted in English and Spanish in February 2020 in 13 databases including grey literature. Of the 7,813 initial records, 152 validations were extracted. From these, 83 instruments (22 versions or adaptations) were excluded for not measuring NSSI, having no potential clinical utility or not including psychometric properties. Finally, 26 (22 versions, 35 adaptations and 19 creations) instruments measuring NSSI were included. Predominantly, the studies were North American self-reports in English for community adolescents, adaptations or versions emanating from a small number of instruments. Twenty-six indicators were categorized to assess NSSI. The most frequent instruments are structured interviews, and their indicators were related to NSSI function and topography. Evidence of validity and reliability was positive but limited. Despite the high number of instruments and diversity of evaluations, we found no instrument with sufficient evidence for clinical assessment. Findings broadly overview NSSI assessment instruments' current use and future improvement in clinical and research settings.     

进食障碍患者家庭顺应量表的汉化及信效度检验

目的 汉化进食障碍患者家庭顺应量表，并检验其信效度。方法 根据Brislin翻译模式将量表翻译成中文，通过专家函询和预调查对量表进行文化调适和修订。将量表应用于300例进食障碍患者照顾者检验信效度。结果 中文版进食障碍患者家庭顺应量表的量表水平内容效度指数为0.918。探索性因子分析结果显示5个因子可解释总变异量的49.862%。量表的各维度得分与量表总分呈中高度相关，各维度得分之间呈中低度相关或不相关。量表总Cronbach′s α为0.877，重测信度为0.883。结论 中文版进食障碍患者家庭顺应量表具有较好的信效度，可用于测量进食障碍患者的家庭顺应情况。     

加拿大问题赌博指数中文版的效度和信度

目的:评估加拿大问题赌博指数中文版(CPGI-C)的效度和信度。方法:选取43例匿名戒赌会成员和202例正常成人为研究对象,将其随机分为两半,分别进行探索性因子分析和验证性因子分析;以赌博相关认知量表(GRCS-C)、Barratt冲动性人格问卷(BIS-11)、抑郁自评量表(SDS)、网络成瘾量表修订版(CIAS-R)和DSM-IV多重反应问卷(DSM-IV-MR)作为效标工具;以受试者工作特征曲线(ROC)评估量表区分问题赌博者的特异度与灵敏度。2周后有5例匿名戒赌会成员和31例正常成人完成重测。结果:CPGI-C的问题赌博指数(PGSI)分量表共9个条目,探索性因子分析得出1个主成分因子,可解释总方差的74.3%;验证性因子分析显示,单因子结构模型的拟合指标良好(χ~2=2.087,CFI=0.926,TLI=0.963,GFI=0.926,IFI=0.978,NFI=0.958, RMSEA=0.094,SRMR=0.032);CPGI总分与各效标量表的总分均呈正相关(r=0.48～0.82,均P<0.001);ROC曲线下面积为0.962,划界分为9.5。CPGI-C的...     

Hardly traceable pitfalls in medical review articles

The main purpose of review articles is to increase insight into the best possible practice for increasing the health condition of future subjects. This requires the collection of as many relevant data as possible from earlier case studies, but such data should be mutually independent. If the data from the reviewed single- or multi-case studies are not entirely mutually independent, the conclusions of the review study may easily – though not necessarily – become biased. This is shown on the basis of a 2020 systematic review about the effects of deep dry needling on spasticity and related physical disabilities. We analyzed this study by checking undisclosed possible overlaps regarding the subjects dealt with in the various case studies that were reviewed. This analysis raised also some questions about the accuracy of the number of subjects that had been treated, which is an aspects of which errors can commonly not be disclosed by the readers. The objective of our Letter is to show that insufficient attention by authors, editor and reviewers for an unambiguous presentation of the data regarding the subjects dealt with can make it impossible for readers to draw correct conclusions regarding the optimization of possible treatments.     

Comparison of PC and iPad administrations of the Cogstate Brief Battery in the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging: Assessing cross-modality equivalence of computerized neuropsychological tests

Objective: Computerized neuropsychological assessments are increasingly used in clinical practice, population studies of cognitive aging and clinical trial enrichment. Subtle, but significant, performance differences have been demonstrated across different modes of test administration and require further investigation.

Method: Participants included cognitively unimpaired adults aged 50 and older from the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging who completed the Cogstate Brief Battery and Cogstate’s Groton Maze Learning Test (GMLT) on an iPad or a personal computer (PC) in the clinic. Mode of administration differences and test–retest reliability coefficients were examined across 3 cohorts: a demographically matched test–retest cohort completing PC and iPad administrations the same day (N?=?168); a test naïve cohort comparing baseline PC (n?=?1820) and iPad (n?=605) performance; and a demographically matched longitudinal cohort completing 3 Cogstate visits over 15 months on either the PC (n?=63) or iPad (n?=63).

Results: Results showed a small but statistically significant and consistent finding for faster performance on PC relative to iPad for several Cogstate Brief Battery measures. Measures of accuracy generally did not differ or differences were very small. The GMLT showed faster performance and higher total errors on iPad. Most Cogstate variables showed no difference in the rate of change across PC and iPad administrations.

Conclusions: There are small, but significant, differences in performance when giving the same cognitive tests on a PC or an iPad. Future studies are needed to better understand if these small differences impact the clinical interpretation of results and research outcomes.