[Delirium: screening, assessment and diagnosis]

Delirium diagnosis remains inconsistent due to differing classification systems. The DSM-IV and ICD-10 both define delirium but with distinct criteria. ICD-10 adds psychomotor, sleep-wake, and emotional criteria, making diagnosis more restrictive. This gap motivated examining screening tools. Prior research has shown that up to 60% of DSM-IV cases may be missed by ICD-10. No prior work had resolved how these differences affect clinical practice. Nurses in Switzerland have adopted specific instruments for delirium detection. This gap motivated comparing available tools. That uncertainty drove the focus on DOS and CAM. No prior work had resolved how these tools function in non-English settings.

The study aimed to evaluate delirium screening and assessment tools used in a Swiss program. It focused on the DOS and CAM instruments. The goal was to report their application in a local patient population. The researchers wanted to ensure these tools function in German. The study also aimed to explain DSM-IV and ICD-10 diagnostic criteria. The authors sought to clarify how these systems influence diagnosis. They wanted to show how nurses use these tools in practice. The purpose was to provide theoretical and practical guidance for delirium diagnosis.

The study used existing classification systems for delirium diagnosis. It compared DSM-IV and ICD-10 criteria for consistency. The researchers analyzed how these systems affect case detection. They evaluated the DOS and CAM instruments for use in clinical settings. The tools were translated into German for local application. The study reported how these tools were used in a Swiss patient population. The authors described the theoretical basis for using these criteria. The methods included reviewing literature and reporting clinical implementation.

DOS and CAM were used in a Swiss delirium program. The DOS is an observational tool for initial screening. The CAM requires structured interviews for detailed assessment. Both tools were translated into German for local use. The study showed these instruments function well in non-English settings. DSM-IV criteria detect more cases than ICD-10 in some populations. ICD-10 requires three additional criteria for diagnosis. The study confirmed that up to 60% of DSM-IV cases may be missed by ICD-10.

The study confirmed that DOS and CAM are effective in delirium screening. The authors stated that DSM-IV criteria detect more cases than ICD-10. They proposed that ICD-10 criteria may miss up to 60% of cases. The study showed these tools work well in German-speaking settings. The authors suggested that clinical practice should consider both systems. They emphasized the importance of using structured tools like CAM. The study concluded that translation does not reduce tool effectiveness. The authors proposed that nurses can use DOS and CAM for reliable detection.