Allison Clemens
April
ababaabhay
achoi2392
adhoward1

2025 PACUPrep BCCCP Preparatory Course Delirium Agitation & Anxiety Diagnostic Assessment and Classification in ICU Delirium, Agitation & Anxiety

Lesson 84, Topic 2

In Progress

← Previous

Diagnostic Assessment and Classification in ICU Delirium, Agitation & Anxiety

Lesson Progress

0% Complete

Objective

Apply diagnostic and classification frameworks to identify ICU delirium, agitation & anxiety, stratify severity, and guide initial management.

1. Core Clinical Criteria for Delirium

Summary: Delirium is an acute disturbance in attention and awareness with a fluctuating course. Recognizing its key features distinguishes it from dementia, withdrawal, and primary psychiatric disorders.

DSM-IV Criteria (all ICU delirium requires):

Acute onset and fluctuating course
Inattention
Disorganized thinking
Altered level of consciousness

Diagnosis = features 1 + 2 + (3 or 4)

Differential Diagnosis:

Dementia: Insidious onset, progressive decline.
Withdrawal: Identifiable history of alcohol/benzodiazepines, autonomic signs.
Primary psychosis: Preserved attention, no waxing–waning course.

Clinical Pearl: The Silent Epidemic

Hypoactive delirium, characterized by lethargy and decreased responsiveness, is the most common subtype in the ICU. However, it is often underrecognized without the use of validated screening tools, leading to delayed intervention and worse outcomes.

2. Bedside Diagnostic Tools

Summary: Routine delirium screening with validated tools—the Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU (CAM-ICU) and the Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist (ICDSC)—improves detection and standardizes assessment across ventilated and nonventilated patients.

A. Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU (CAM-ICU)

Four features: 1. Acute change or fluctuating course, 2. Inattention (e.g., picture or letter recognition task), 3. Disorganized thinking, and 4. Altered consciousness (mapped to RASS).
Scoring: Delirium is present if features 1 and 2 are present, plus either feature 3 or 4.
Psychometrics: High sensitivity (90–95%) and specificity (90–99%); excellent inter-rater reliability (κ > 0.80) after brief training.
Limitations: Cannot be assessed in deeply sedated or comatose patients (RASS ≤–3); requires periodic retraining to maintain accuracy.

B. Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist (ICDSC)

Eight items observed over a nursing shift: Altered consciousness, inattention, disorientation, hallucinations/delusions, psychomotor agitation/retardation, inappropriate speech or mood, sleep–wake cycle disturbance, and symptom fluctuation.
Scoring: A score of ≥4 indicates delirium.
Psychometrics: Good sensitivity (74–99%) but more variable specificity (64–82%).
Advantages: Captures symptom burden and fluctuations over time but is less rapid than the point-in-time CAM-ICU.

C. CAM-ICU-7 Severity Scale (Optional)

This tool converts the binary CAM-ICU result into a 7-point numeric severity score, which has been shown to correlate with delirium duration and adverse outcomes. Its adoption is limited by the need for EHR integration and specific training materials.

Comparison of Bedside Delirium Screening Tools
Tool	Mode	Time	Sensitivity	Specificity
CAM-ICU	Algorithm	1–2 min	90–95%	90–99%
ICDSC	Checklist	Shift-based	74–99%	64–82%
CAM-ICU-7	Severity Score	2–3 min	—	—

Clinical Pearl: Unmasking Delirium

If a patient is unassessable for delirium (e.g., RASS -4) and the CAM-ICU is therefore negative, this does not rule out delirium. If clinically appropriate, sedation should be lightened to a target RASS of –2 to 0 before reassessment to avoid missing a diagnosis masked by deep sedation.

3. Laboratory and Imaging Workup

Summary: A targeted workup is essential to exclude reversible contributors to delirium. Laboratory studies and imaging should be guided by the clinical context rather than performed routinely.

Basic Laboratory Panel:

Electrolytes: Sodium (Na⁺), Potassium (K⁺), Calcium (Ca²⁺), Magnesium (Mg²⁺), Phosphate
Renal/Hepatic Function: BUN, creatinine, AST/ALT, bilirubin
Complete Blood Count (CBC) with differential
Toxicology Screen: Indicated when overdose or withdrawal is suspected.

Adjunctive Markers:

Inflammatory markers like C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin may be elevated but are non-specific. Research-level markers include various cytokines.

Neuroimaging:

Noncontrast CT or MRI of the head is indicated for new focal neurologic signs, new-onset seizures, or significant head trauma. Routine imaging in the absence of these findings has a very low diagnostic yield.

Clinical Pearl: Treat Reversible Causes First

Before attributing delirium to complex causes like sepsis or sedative effects, always correct common metabolic derangements. Aggressively correcting hyponatremia (target >130 mEq/L) and hypomagnesemia (target >1.5 mg/dL) can sometimes resolve delirium without further escalation of care.

4. Electrophysiologic and Biomarker Adjuncts

Summary: Electroencephalography (EEG) and serum biomarkers can provide precision phenotyping and prognostic information but remain largely investigational tools for routine clinical practice.

Figure 1: Advanced Delirium Diagnostics. EEG and blood biomarkers are emerging tools that help characterize the underlying neurobiology of delirium, offering potential for future precision-guided therapies.

EEG Findings: Typical delirium is associated with generalized slowing (an increase in theta/delta wave activity), reduced alpha power, and disrupted connectivity. A normal EEG makes delirium unlikely and is crucial for excluding nonconvulsive status epilepticus.
Blood Biomarkers: Neurofilament light chain (a marker of neuronal injury) correlates with delirium severity, while proinflammatory cytokines (e.g., Interleukin-6) and reduced acetylcholinesterase activity support key pathophysiologic hypotheses.
Prognostic Models: The PRE-DELIRIC model uses 10 clinical variables (e.g., age, admission diagnosis, sedative exposure) to predict a patient’s risk of developing delirium (AUC ≈0.74).

Key Point: Clinical Use vs. Research

While promising, EEG and serum biomarkers should be used selectively in clinical practice, primarily to rule out alternative diagnoses like seizures. Their routine use for prognostication or guiding therapy should await further prospective data demonstrating a clear impact on patient outcomes.

5. Classification and Severity Scoring

Summary: Stratifying delirium by its psychomotor subtype, suspected etiology, and severity is critical for informing the urgency of interventions and facilitating multidisciplinary care planning.

Psychomotor Subtypes:

Hyperactive: Characterized by agitation, restlessness, and emotional lability. Represents 5–15% of cases.
Hypoactive: Characterized by lethargy, apathy, and reduced motor activity. This is the most common subtype but is frequently missed.
Mixed: Features alternating periods of hyper- and hypoactive delirium. This subtype may predict a more prolonged course.

Etiologic Phenotypes:

Sedation-associated Delirium
Septic Delirium
Hypoxic Delirium
Metabolic Delirium

Severity Assessment: Can be performed using the CAM-ICU-7 score or by tracking trends in the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS) over time.

Integration: Embedding the subtype, etiology, and severity into clinical decision algorithms is key. For example, sedation-associated delirium prompts a sedation taper, whereas septic delirium requires urgent source control and antibiotic optimization.

Clinical Pearl: The First Step in Management

Sedation-associated delirium is one of the most common and modifiable phenotypes. It often improves significantly with simple sedative de-escalation (e.g., reducing propofol or dexmedetomidine infusion rates). Persistent delirium despite this measure warrants a broader workup for other etiologies.

6. Implementation and Workflow

Summary: Embedding delirium screening and classification into routine ICU workflows with clear escalation pathways is crucial for ensuring timely detection and response.

Figure 2: Sample ICU Delirium Workflow. A structured, protocolized approach ensures that positive delirium screens are not missed and lead to concrete clinical actions.

Screening Frequency: At least once per nursing shift (every 8–12 hours). Consider more frequent screening (every 4–6 hours) in clinically unstable patients or after a change in mental status.
Documentation: Use standardized EHR flowsheets to capture the tool used, the score, the assessed psychomotor subtype, and severity.
EHR Integration: Best practice includes automated prompts for screening, delirium risk dashboards, and alert triggers for positive screens.
Escalation Pathways: A positive screen or a high-severity score (e.g., CAM-ICU-7 ≥6, RASS ≥+2) should prompt a standardized response, such as a pharmacist consultation, a review of deliriogenic medications, and implementation of safety interventions.

Clinical Pearl: Checklists Drive Compliance

Incorporating delirium screening (e.g., “CAM-ICU assessed?”) into daily ICU goals checklists is a powerful implementation strategy. Studies show this simple intervention can raise screening compliance from as low as 20% to over 80%, leading to a measurable reduction in incident delirium by approximately 30%.

References

American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 4th ed. Washington, DC; 1994.
Ely EW, Inouye SK, Bernard GR, et al. Delirium in mechanically ventilated patients: validity and reliability of the CAM-ICU. JAMA. 2001;286(21):2703–2710.
Bergeron N, Dubois MJ, Dumont M, et al. Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist: evaluation of a new screening tool. Intensive Care Med. 2001;27(5):859–864.
Barr J, Fraser GL, Puntillo K, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for pain, agitation, and delirium in adult ICU patients. Crit Care Med. 2013;41(1):263–306.
Devlin JW, Skrobik Y, Gelinas C, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for PADIS in adult ICU patients. Crit Care Med. 2018;46(9):e825–e873.
Krewulak KD, Stelfox HT, Fiest KM, et al. Incidence and prevalence of delirium subtypes in adult ICU: systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Care Med. 2018;46(12):2029–2035.
van den Boogaard M, Pickkers P, Slooter AJ, et al. Development and validation of PRE-DELIRIC delirium prediction model. BMJ. 2012;344:e420.
Boord MS, Moezzi B, Davis D, et al. EEG measures associate with delirium: a systematic review. Clin Neurophysiol. 2021;132(1):246–257.
Chan CK, Song Y, Greene R, et al. Meta-analysis of ICU delirium biomarkers and alignment with NIA-AA framework. Am J Crit Care. 2021;30(4):312–319.
Hughes CG, Boncyk CS, Fedeles B, et al. Association between cholinesterase activity and critical illness brain dysfunction. Crit Care. 2022;26(1):377.
Ankravs MJ, McKenzie CA, Kenes MT. Precision-based approaches to delirium in critical illness: narrative review. Pharmacotherapy. 2023;43(11):1139–1153.

2025 PACUPrep BCCCP Preparatory Course

Pulmonary

Participants 432

Diagnostic Assessment and Classification in ICU Delirium, Agitation & Anxiety

Diagnostic Assessment and Classification in ICU Delirium, Agitation & Anxiety

Objective

1. Core Clinical Criteria for Delirium

DSM-IV Criteria (all ICU delirium requires):

Differential Diagnosis:

2. Bedside Diagnostic Tools

A. Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU (CAM-ICU)

B. Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist (ICDSC)

C. CAM-ICU-7 Severity Scale (Optional)

3. Laboratory and Imaging Workup

Basic Laboratory Panel:

Adjunctive Markers:

Neuroimaging:

4. Electrophysiologic and Biomarker Adjuncts

5. Classification and Severity Scoring

Psychomotor Subtypes:

Etiologic Phenotypes:

6. Implementation and Workflow

References