Objective To develop and validate a new standardized confusion assessment method (CAM) that enables nonpsychiatric clinicians to detect delirium quickly in high-risk settings. Design Prospective validation study. Setting Conducted in general medicine wards and in an outpatient geriatric assessment center at Yale University (site 1) and in general medicine wards at the University of Chicago (site 2). Patients The study included 56 subjects, ranging in age from 65 to 98 years. At site 1, 10 patients with and 20 without delirium participated; at site 2, 16 patients with and 10 without delirium participated. Measurements and main results An expert panel developed the CAM through a consensus building process. The CAM instrument, which can be completed in less than 5 minutes, consists of nine operationalized criteria from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-III-R). An a priori hypothesis was established for the diagnostic value of four criteria: acute onset and fluctuating course, inattention, disorganized thinking, and altered level of consciousness. The CAM algorithm for diagnosis of delirium required the presence of both the first and the second criteria and of either the third or the fourth criterion. At both sites, the diagnoses made by the CAM were concurrently validated against the diagnoses made by psychiatrists. At sites 1 and 2 values for sensitivity were 100% and 94%, respectively; values for specificity were 95% and 90%; values for positive predictive accuracy were 91% and 94%; and values for negative predictive accuracy were 100% and 90%. The CAM algorithm had the highest predictive accuracy for all possible combinations of the nine features of delirium. The CAM was shown to have convergent agreement with four other mental status tests, including the Mini-Mental State Examination. The interobserver reliability of the CAM was high (kappa = 0.81 - 1.0). Conclusions The CAM is sensitive, specific, reliable, and easy to use for identification of delirium.

Clarifying Confusion: The Confusion Assessment Method: A New Method for Detection of Delirium

Affirming Diversity: The Sociopolitical Context of Multicultural Education

Group A streptococci are model extracellular gram-positive pathogens responsible for pharyngitis, impetigo, rheumatic fever, and acute glomerulonephritis. A resurgence of invasive streptococcal diseases and rheumatic fever has appeared in outbreaks over the past 10 years, with a predominant M1 serotype as well as others identified with the outbreaks. emm (M protein) gene sequencing has changed serotyping, and new virulence genes and new virulence regulatory networks have been defined. The emm gene superfamily has expanded to include antiphagocytic molecules and immunoglobulin-binding proteins with common structural features. At least nine superantigens have been characterized, all of which may contribute to toxic streptococcal syndrome. An emerging theme is the dichotomy between skin and throat strains in their epidemiology and genetic makeup. Eleven adhesins have been reported, and surface plasmin-binding proteins have been defined. The strong resistance of the group A streptococcus to phagocytosis is related to factor H and fibrinogen binding by M protein and to disarming complement component C5a by the C5a peptidase. Molecular mimicry appears to play a role in autoimmune mechanisms involved in rheumatic fever, while nephritis strain-associated proteins may lead to immune-mediated acute glomerulonephritis. Vaccine strategies have focused on recombinant M protein and C5a peptidase vaccines, and mucosal vaccine delivery systems are under investigation.

Pathogenesis of Group A Streptococcal Infections

Comprehensive geriatric assessment: a meta-analysis of controlled trials

Papillomaviruses in the causation of human cancers — a brief historical account

In response to the needs and demands of an aging population, geriatric medicine has grown rapidly during the past 3 decades. The discipline has defined its core values as well as the knowledge base and clinical skills needed to improve the health, functioning, and well-being of older persons and to provide appropriate palliative care. Geriatric medicine has developed new models of care, advanced the treatment of common geriatric conditions, and advocated for the health and health care of older persons. Nevertheless, at the beginning of the 21st century, the health care of older persons is at a crossroads. Despite the substantial progress that geriatric medicine has made, much more remains to be done to meet the healthcare needs of our aging population. The clinical, educational, and research approaches of the 20th century are unable to keep pace and require major revisions. Maintaining the status quo will mean falling further and further behind. The healthcare delivery and financing systems need fundamental redesign to improve quality and eliminate waste. The American Geriatrics Society (AGS) Task Force on the Future of Geriatric Medicine has identified five goals aimed at optimizing the health of older persons: To ensure that every older person receives high-quality, patient-centered health care; To expand the geriatrics knowledge base; To increase the number of healthcare professionals who employ the principles of geriatric medicine in caring for older persons; To recruit physicians and other healthcare professionals into careers in geriatric medicine; To unite professional and lay groups in the effort to influence public policy to continually improve the health and health care of seniors. Geriatric medicine cannot accomplish these goals alone. Accordingly, the Task Force has articulated a set of recommendations primarily aimed at the government, organizations, agencies, foundations, and other partners whose collaboration will be essential in accomplishing these goals. The vision described in this document and the accompanying recommendations are only the broad outline of an agenda for the future. Geriatric medicine, through its professional organizations and its partners, will need to mobilize resources to identify and implement the specific steps that will make the vision a reality. Doing so will require broad participation, consensus building, creativity, and perseverance. The consequences of inaction will be profound. The combination of a burgeoning number of older persons and an inadequately prepared, poorly organized physician workforce is a recipe for expensive, fragmented health care that does not meet the needs of our older population. By virtue of their unique skills and advocacy for the health of older persons, geriatricians can be key leaders of change to achieve the goals of geriatric medicine and optimize the health of our aging population. Nevertheless, the goals of geriatric medicine will be accomplished only if geriatricians and their partners work in a system that is designed to provide high-quality, efficient care and recognizes the value of geriatrics.

Caring for older Americans: the future of geriatric medicine.

Previous studies have shown that comprehensive geriatric assessment and follow-up can improve the health of hospitalized elderly patients. To evaluate the effectiveness of consultative geriatric assessment and limited follow-up for ambulatory patients, we randomized 600 elderly patients who were enrolled in a health maintenance organization into three groups: (1) consultation by a geriatric assessment team, (2) consultation by a "second opinion" internist, and (3) only traditional health maintenance organization services (control patients). The geriatric assessment team identified previously unrecognized problems in 35% of patients and advised changes in medication regimens for more than 40%. Nevertheless, patients who received assessment achieved only a small benefit in cognitive function after 3 months, which was not sustained for 1 year. There was no difference among groups in other measures of health status. Consultative geriatric assessment with limited follow-up did not benefit most older ambulatory patients in a health maintenance organization; if such care can be used effectively for ambulatory patients, it will require either additional targeting or continuing care or both. (JAMA. 1990;263:538-544)

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/articlepdf/380401/jama_263_4_032.pdf

Consultative Geriatric Assessment for Ambulatory Patients: A Randomized Trial in a Health Maintenance Organization

Previous studies have suggested that geriatric assessment units may provide important benefits to the care of elderly persons. In early 1985 we surveyed personnel at 104 (91%) of the existing 114 geriatric assessment units associated with medical schools and Veterans Administration medical centers for information on the units' development and operation. Although almost 80% of the units were hospital based, most (61%) provided care for outpatients. Nearly half (47%) began operation in 1983 or later; of those in existence before 1983, two thirds have increased their capacity since then. The types of personnel and their training differed substantially among units. Fifty percent of the physicians had had no formal training in geriatrics. Of the 104 units, 99 (95%) did routine assessment. The estimated time spent per new patient in outpatient units was 2.7 +/- 2.1 (SD) hours. These data suggest that geriatric assessment units are proliferating rapidly, have differing structures, and consume substantial resources. Further efforts are needed to define their optimal structure, targets, and function.

The emergence of geriatric assessment units. The "new technology of geriatrics".

Because delay in time to surgery beyond 24–48 h has been observed in many studies to be associated with adverse outcomes, a survey in nine centers in Italy was undertaken to examine the impact of time to surgery on mortality and disability at 6 months after hospitalization. Delays in surgery for hip fracture have been reported to be associated with negative outcomes. However, most studies are based on retrospective analysis of hospital discharge data, which cannot determine functional status or general health status of patients prior to the fracture. Using a prospective cohort design, data were collected on 3,707 patients aged >50 years during hospitalization for hip fracture and in a 6-month postdischarge follow-up. Baseline information included age, gender, living arrangement, prefracture walking ability, walking aid, ASA grade, type and reason of fracture, time to surgery, type of surgery, date and destination at discharge, and osteoporosis treatment. Follow-up data included living arrangement, walking ability, and mortality. Six-month mortality was positively associated with increasing age, comorbidity, prefracture functional disability, and having surgery more than 48 h after admission. Higher levels of functional status at 6 months were independently associated with surgery occurring within 24 h of the fracture and with osteoporosis therapy at discharge. Walking disability was associated with older age, comorbidity, disability before fracture, and time to surgery after 24 h. Delay in surgery is a major cause of mortality and disability at 6 months, and interventions to modify this pattern of care are urgently needed.

Richard W. Besdine

Papers

Caring for older Americans: the future of geriatric medicine.

Consultative Geriatric Assessment for Ambulatory Patients: A Randomized Trial in a Health Maintenance Organization

The emergence of geriatric assessment units. The "new technology of geriatrics".

A multicenter survey on profile of care for hip fracture: predictors of mortality and disability.

Acute confusional states (delirium) in the hospitalized elderly.