Journal of Psychosomatic Research 65 (2008) 215 – 222

Delirium phenomenology: What can we learn from

the symptoms of delirium?
Nitin Gupta a,⁎, Jos de Jonghe b , Jan Schieveld c , Maeve Leonard d , David Meagher e
a
South Staffordshire and Shropshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, Burton on Trent, United Kingdom
b
Department of Geriatic Medicine, Medical Center Alkmaar, Alkmaar, The Netherlands
c
Department of Psychiatry and Neuropsychology, Division of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht,
The Netherlands
d
Limerick Regional Hospital, Limerick, Ireland
e
Department of Psychiatry, Midwestern Regional Hospital, Health Systems Research Centre, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland

Received 9 March 2008; received in revised form 11 May 2008; accepted 15 May 2008

Abstract

Objectives: This review focuses on phenomenological studies
of delirium, including subsyndromal and prodromal concepts,
and their relevance to other elements of clinical profile.
Methods: A Medline search using the keywords delirium, phe-
nomenology, and symptoms for new data articles published in
English between 1998 and 2008 was utilized. The search was
supplemented by additional material not identified by Medline
but known to the authors. Results: Understanding of prodromal
and subsyndromal concepts is still in its infancy. The
characteristic profile can differentiate delirium from other
neuropsychiatric disorders. Clinical (motoric) subtyping holds
potential but more consistent methods are needed. Studies are
Keywords: Delirium; Phenomenology
almost entirely cross-sectional in design and generally lack
comprehensive symptom assessment. Multiple assessment tools
are available but are oriented towards hyperactive features and
few have demonstrated ability to distinguish delirium from
dementia. There is insufficient evidence linking specific
phenomenology with etiology, pathophysiology, management,
course, and outcome. Conclusions: Despite the major advance-
ments of the past decade in many aspects of delirium research,
further phenomenological work is crucial to targeting studies of
causation, pathophysiology, treatment, and prognosis. We
identified eight key areas for future studies.
© 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Introduction mentation and study design. Key areas for further study
are highlighted.
Delirium is a complex neuropsychiatric syndrome of
multifactorial etiology and protean manifestations. Its
Method
phenomenological presentation is highly variable and
differs according to etiological causation, underlying
A Medline search for English language articles using
pathophysiology, management, and course [1]. This review
the keywords delirium, symptoms, or phenomenology
focuses on how studies of the past decade have illuminated
published during the 10 years since the previous review
our understanding of delirium and considers methodologi-
by Meagher and Trzepacz [1] identified 1267 articles.
cal issues for phenomenological studies including instru-
When only those reporting new data about either DSM-III-
R and subsequent versions or ICD-10 delirium were
⁎ Corresponding author. considered, 195 articles remained, of which 47 were
E-mail address: nitingupta659@yahoo.co.in (N. Gupta). selected for the review (see Fig. 1). Fifteen additional

0022-3999/08/$ – see front matter © 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jpsychores.2008.05.020
216 N. Gupta et al. / Journal of Psychosomatic Research 65 (2008) 215–222
Fig. 1. Process of article selection.
articles were not identified by this search method but were
known to the authors due to their interest in the area.
The phenomenological complexity of delirium
Delirium involves a wide range of cognitive disturbances
and noncognitive neuropsychiatric symptoms across the
domains of motor behavior, sleep–wake cycle, affective
expression, perception, and thinking. This broad phenom-
enological range reflects generalized disruption of brain
function and can mimic many other neuropsychiatric
disorders. Despite the variety of causes, delirium has a
consistent presentation that reflects dysfunction of a final
common neural pathway [2]. Understanding particular
symptom frequencies and patterns can provide important
clues regarding neurobiological underpinnings [3]. Delir-
ium includes essential diagnostic symptoms (e.g., inatten-
tion, disorganized thinking) as well as core features that
are consistent in presentation (e.g., sleep–wake cycle
disturbances, motor activity changes), as well as other
features that are more variable (e.g., psychosis, affective
changes) and reflect the influence of particular etiologies,
comorbidities, medical treatments, or individual patient
vulnerabilities (see Table 1).
Historically, ‘clouding of consciousness’ has been used to
describe cognitive impairment in delirium but is a vague
concept that reflects impairment in a number of cognitive
domains including attention, alertness, vigilance, and
comprehension. Attention is impaired in all of its aspects
such that delirious patients have difficulty in mobilizing,
shifting, and sustaining attention [25]. Inattention is a
consistent feature, crucial to diagnosis, and is highly
prevalent in patients who have subsyndromal illness or
syndromal delirium with few symptoms [26]. It correlates
highly with other elements of cognition but is disproportio-
nately affected [4]. Short- and long-term memory, orienta-
tion, comprehension, vigilance, visuospatial ability, and
executive function are also impaired. Both short- and long-
term memory are impaired but with particular disruption of
recent memory due to diminished capacity to incorporate
new experience. Disorientation to time, place, and identity of
others is common and often used to screen for disturbed
cognition in clinical settings but prone to inaccuracy due to
its fluctuating nature. Visuospatial disturbances impair
patient functionality in ward environments. Constructional
apraxia measured on the Clock Drawing Test is sensitive to
cognitive impairment in general but lacks specificity for
delirium [27].
Speech and language disturbances (abnormal semantic
content, dysnomia, paraphasias, incoherence, word-finding
difficulties) are common [28]. Disorganization of thinking
(tangentiality, loosened associations, circumstantiality) is a
key diagnostic indicator, but the frequency of different forms
of thought disorder is less well studied. Various forms of
dysgraphia (spelling errors, jagged writing, and construc-
tional dyspraxia) may assist delirium detection [29]. Sleep–
wake cycle disturbances range from napping and nocturnal
disruptions to severe disintegration of the normal circadian
cycle. Motoric disturbances range from hyperactive to
hypoactive [30].
Psychotic features complicate approximately 50% of
cases [5,31] and are more common in hyperactive presenta-
tions but may occur in hypoactive patients as well [6,32].
Hallucinations are commonly visual, while delusional
content involves misidentifications, themes of imminent
danger, or bizarre happenings in the immediate environment
[7]. Affective lability is typical of delirium, but recent studies
Table 1
Frequency of phenomenological manifestations in delirium [4–24]
Core diagnostic features
Attentional deficits (97–100%)
Thought process abnormalities (54–79%)
Other core symptoms
Disorientation (76–96%)
Memory deficits (88–96%)
Sleep–wake cycle disturbances (92–97%)
Motoric alterations (24–94%)
Language disturbances (57–67%)
Non-core symptoms
Perceptual disturbances (50–63%)
Delusions (21–31%)
Affective changes (43–86%)
 N. Gupta et al. / Journal of Psychosomatic Research 65 (2008) 215–222
have highlighted the frequency of more sustained mood
disturbances that complicate differentiation from hypomania
in agitated cases and depression in hypoactive presentations
[31,33].
Clinical subtypes
Disturbances of motor behavior in delirium are almost
invariably present [4,26] and highly visible. Almost 30 studies
exist and suggest that motorically defined clinical subtypes of
delirium differ with regard to presence of nonmotoric
symptoms [6], etiology [8,34], pathophysiology [35,36],
detection rates [37], treatment experience [38,39], episode
duration, and outcome [9,40,41]. However, findings have
been inconsistent with better prognosis variously identified
in hypoactive patients [42], hyperactive presentations
[40,43], or patients without disturbed motor behavior [44].
Various definitions for motor subtypes exist; Lipowski
[45] described ‘hyperactive’ and ‘hypoactive’ psychomotoric
presentations and later added a third ‘mixed’ category where
elements of both occur within short time frames [46]. Liptzin
and Levkoff [41] specified criteria based on activity and
associated psychomotoric behaviors. O'Keeffe [47] adapted
items from the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale to describe
subtypes according to activity within the first 48 h of
delirium. Other approaches include the use of symptom
items from the Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale
(MDAS) [48], the Delirium Rating Scale (DRS) [49], and
its recent revision (DRS-R-98) [50], as well as visual analog
scales [8] and ‘clinical impression’ [43].
The comparability of existing studies of motorically
defined subtypes is limited. Recent work identified only 34%
concordance between four commonly used subtyping
methods [51]. Greater focus on ‘pure’ motor features and
correlation with independent measures of motor behavior
can validate subtyping methods. Electronic motion analysis
(accelerometry) concurs with observed gross movement and
distinguishes subtypes with regard to quantitative and
qualitative movement [52].
There is little information about the longitudinal course of
motor profile in delirium, and to date, studies have not
assessed subtype stability over time. Marcantonio et al. [10]
studied delirium symptom persistence over a week in elderly
patients and found that both lethargy and restlessness
remained stable in most (95%) patients. Fann et al. [11]
found great consistency in psychomotor disturbance in the
30 days after stem cell transplantation.
Subsyndromal illness
Accumulating evidence points towards a diagnostic
spectrum of delirium. Subsyndromal delirium (SSD) was
first described by Lipowski [45], and subsequently, it has
been defined by the presence of any core delirium symptoms
or severity scores on rating scales that are below diagnostic
217
threshold [53–57]. Prevalence rates of 30–50% have been
reported in intensive care unit and post-acute nursing home
facilities with SSD subjects having intermediate outcomes
(in terms of morbidity, mortality, and length of hospital stay)
between those with and without delirium [56,57].
SSD may reflect the impact of different predisposing
(e.g., dementia) and precipitating factors (e.g., trauma) upon
neuropsychiatric profile. Hypoactive patients may be over-
represented because they are too ill to present the overactive
behaviors that are scored on severity rating scales. Greater
clarity regarding the diagnosis of SSD, including the
relevance of individual symptoms, is needed.
Prodromal phase
A prodromal phase can occur before full syndromal illness
becomes evident. This varies from hours to days or even
weeks and includes difficulty concentrating, sleep distur-
bances, vivid dreams, disorientation, tiredness, irritability,
restlessness, anxiety, depression, or noise sensitivity. Sirois
[12] reported that headaches and general uneasiness were
common prior to manifesting delirium. Duppils and Wikblad
[58] found that anxiety, frequent calls for assistance,
disorientation, psychomotor restlessness, and inattention
were prevalent in 62% of hip fracture patients for 48 h
before developing delirium. de Jonghe et al. [59] studied
delirium symptom emergence in postoperative hip-surgery
patients using the DRS-R-98; memory impairment, disor-
ientation, and formal thought disorder predicted delirium
independent of baseline risk factors. Greater awareness of the
early signs of delirium can inform our understanding of
neuropathogenesis and allow earlier detection of those at risk.
Assessment tools
Assessment tools can facilitate improved recognition and
differential diagnosis, monitor symptom severity, and assess
treatment response. Delirium diagnosis is based on a clinical
interview with the patient, discussion with relatives and
nursing staff, and medical note review. This can be
supplemented by specific symptom assessment tools.
Electroencephalography typically shows slow wave activity
in delirium patients [60] and can assist diagnosis in difficult
cases, including the differentiation of delirium comorbid
with dementia from dementia alone [61].
Delirium symptom rating scales have advantages over
clinical observations in terms of objectivity, standardization,
and the availability of normative data. Screening scales
include the Confusion Assessment Method [62], the
Delirium Symptom Interview [63], the NEECHAM Confu-
sion Scale [64], the Cognitive Test for Delirium (CTD) [65],
and the Delirium Observation Scale [66]. The DRS revised
version (DRS-R-98) [50] is the most frequently used severity
measure. Other valid and reliable severity measures include
the MDAS [48], Confusional State Evaluation [67], Delirium
218 N. Gupta et al. / Journal of Psychosomatic Research 65 (2008) 215–222
Severity Scale [68], Delirium Index [69], and the Delirium-
O-Meter [13]. One criticism of these scales is the bias
towards hyperactive delirium symptomatology. Moreover,
only three tools have been validated for their ability to
distinguish delirium from dementia: the DRS [49], DRS-R-
98 [50], and CTD [65].
Differential diagnosis
The phenomenological complexity of delirium brings
with it a wide differential diagnosis that includes the
dementias, functional psychosis, and depression. The
distinction from dementia is complicated by high comorbid-
ity, with 22–89% cases of dementia complicated by delirium
[70]. In general, the characteristic features of delirium
(abrupt onset, fluctuating course, disturbed consciousness,
and inattention) are absent in Alzheimer's dementia where
memory impairment is the cardinal feature. Sleep–wake
cycle disruption, psychotic symptoms, and thought dis-
turbances are more suggestive of delirium [71,72], while
studies exploring the influence of comorbid dementia on
delirium presentation indicate that delirium symptoms
dominate but with greater cognitive disturbance and
disorganized thinking in comorbid cases [14–16,73]. There
is a paucity of studies comparing neuropsychiatric profile in
delirium versus dementia complicated by behavioral and
psychological symptoms. Differentiation from Lewy Body
dementia (DLB) is particularly challenging because dis-
turbed attention, visual hallucinations, and symptom fluctua-
tion are common features of DLB but neuroleptic sensitivity,
autonomic dysfunction, and systematized delusions are
infrequent in delirium compared with DLB [74]. Because
delirium represents a medical emergency, acute alterations of
mental state should be assumed to be delirium until proven
otherwise [28].
Depression is a common differential for ‘hypoactive’
delirium. In major depression, symptom onset is less acute
and mood disturbances are more sustained and typically
dominate the clinical picture, with cognitive impairments
indicative of ‘pseudodementia’. Symptoms of major depres-
sion occur in delirium (e.g., psychomotor slowing, sleep
disturbances, thoughts of death), but affective lability is the
characteristic disturbance [33]. Hyperactive delirium can
mimic agitated depression or mania, but the widespread and
profound cognitive changes characteristic of delirium along
with the context of illness usually allow differentiation.
In contrast to the complex, often systematized delu-
sional beliefs characteristic of schizophrenia, delusions in
delirium tend to be simple or fragmented and first-rank
symptoms are uncommon [7]. In delirium, illusions,
depersonalization, and derealization are common and
hallucinations tend to be visual (and/or tactile) rather
than auditory. Disorganized thinking may help in distin-
guishing from psychosis [7,17,75], though well-designed
studies are lacking.
Relevance of phenomenology to other elements of
clinical profile
Delirium presentation varies across age groups. Younger
patients experience a similar range of symptoms as in adults
but with less frequent delusions and greater symptom
fluctuation, sleep–wake cycle disturbance, affective lability,
and agitation [18]. Conversely, Leentjens et al. [19] found
more acute onset, more severe perceptual disturbances and
delusions, lability of mood, and agitation but with less severe
cognitive deficits, sleep–wake cycle disturbance, and
symptom fluctuation in childhood delirium compared with
adults, while adult and geriatric delirium differed in
relation to more severe cognitive symptoms in geriatric
delirium. This may reflect differences in brain function
across the age span with developmental immaturity in
children, functional decline in old age, differences in
expression of distress, and differences in etiology, medical
treatments, and reaction to hospitalization.
Delirium typically involves multiple causes interacting to
produce a fluctuating clinical presentation. The classical
stereotype of agitated delirium with psychotic features is
linked to substance withdrawal but psychotic symptoms
occur with many etiologies, including those associated with
quieter presentations. Hyperactivity is more common with
substance-related delirium, and hypoactivity is more com-
mon with metabolic causes and organ failure [8,20,
35,40,43]. The temporal relationship between etiology and
phenomenology is unstudied despite its potential to
illuminate pathogenesis and improve management.
Although delirium is a unitary syndrome, particular
phenomenological profiles may reflect differing pathophy-
siological underpinnings. Localized neuroanatomical lesions
are linked with particular presentations; for example, marked
inattention is associated with disturbances in the nondomi-
nant posterior parietal and prefrontal cortices, brainstem, and
anteromedial thalamus [28]. Simple visual hallucinations
suggest dysfunction of the primary visual cortex whereas
more complex ones implicate the temporal or fusiform
regions [3]. Sleep disturbances may be related to disturbed
melatonin metabolism [76,77]. Hyperactivity has been
linked with middle temporal gyrus damage, and hypoactivity
has been linked with frontostriatal injury [78].
The phenomenological presentation of alcohol-related
delirium may be influenced by genetic factors. Visual
hallucinations during alcohol-withdrawal delirium are more
common in subjects with polymorphisms of genes coding for
the dopamine transporter [79], CCK-A receptor [80], COMT
[81], and NRH–quinone oxidoreductase-2 [82]. Future work
should consider such factors in non-alcohol-related illness.
CSF homovanillic acid levels correlate with delusions and
hallucinations [83]. Future studies of delirium pathophysiol-
ogy should incorporate assessment of individual symptoms
and/or symptom clusters.
Pharmacological management varies with phenomenolo-
gical presentation, with greater use of antipsychotic agents in
 N. Gupta et al. / Journal of Psychosomatic Research 65 (2008) 215–222 219

agitated patients despite evidence indicating usefulness in
hypoactive patients [32,84–86], and effectiveness is not
limited to patients with psychotic features [87]. The extent to
which particular symptoms indicate greater treatment
responsiveness is unclear, but the typical criterion for
response (≥50% improvement in DRS-R-98 scores) requires
improvement across a broad range of symptoms, and
therefore, improvements cannot be merely due to improve-
ments in sleep, psychosis, or motor activity.
Delirium duration is predicted by severity of cognitive
disturbance, mood lability, and sleep–wake cycle disruption
[21,22]. Recovery at 4 weeks was predicted by greater
hyperactivity and inattention but less severe disorientation
[88]. Treloar and Macdonald [9] found the reversibility of
delirium predicted by severity of motor activity, speech and
thought disturbances, and fluctuating course. Fann et al. [11]
found that psychomotor changes, sleep–wake cycle dis-
turbance, and psychotic symptoms dominated early on while
cognitive impairment peaked at 1 week and dominated
thereafter. Kiely et al. [44] studied elderly patients with
delirium in post-acute facilities and found that 1 year
mortality was predicted by severity of motor disturbance.
The prognostic relevance of individual symptoms across
different populations followed over the course of delirium
episodes requires further study.
Existing studies of delirium phenomenology
An important shortcoming of existing work is that the
majority of studies have not used instrumentation that
captures the breadth of delirium as a syndrome. However, the
development of standardized and validated tools such as the
MDAS, the DRS-R-98, and the CTD has allowed better
understanding of the importance of particular features; the
sleep–wake cycle disturbance is almost invariable in
delirium, and the severity and type of disturbances
(fragmentation, cycle reversal) differ considerably from the
milder sleep disturbances common in nondelirious hospita-
lized elderly, prompting some to advocate delirium as a
disorder of circadian rhythm [89]. More detailed phenom-
enological studies can clarify suitable features for diagnosis
and detection; Bosisio et al. [90] compared delirium and
nondelirious patients with a variety of psychiatric diagnoses
and found that most DRS and MDAS items were more
common in delirium, especially general cognitive function,
sleep, and psychomotor disturbance, while perceptual
disturbances and delusions were least discriminating.
Studies are almost entirely cross-sectional in design and,
thus, cannot account for the complex and varying nature of
delirium phenomenology over time. The fluctuating nature
of delirium is a key diagnostic criterion in both ICD-10
and DSM-IV definitions [91,92]. Some existing work
indicates that individual symptoms follow separate
trajectories. A prospective study of stem cell transplanta-
tion patients found that noncognitive features dominated
in the early stages of delirium while cognitive impairment
peaked after 1 week and dominated thereafter [11]. Meagher
et al. [4] found disorientation much less consistent than other
cognitive elements over a 24-h period in a palliative care
population. Subsequent work involving biweekly assess-
ments demonstrated considerable symptom variation, with
inattention being the most consistent feature over episode
course [93]. Key outstanding issues for longitudinal
studies are whether early presentation predicts course
and whether symptoms follow a unitary or more varied
trajectory over time. Such work can identify features that
are more consistent (and therefore useful for detection
purposes) and provide clues regarding shared pathophy-
siological underpinnings.
The usefulness of factor analysis in exploring the
relationship between symptoms in complex disorders is
predicated on adequately accounting for the phenomenolo-
gical breadth of the syndrome. Studies to date (see Table 2)
have identified two to three factor solutions with typically a
composite cognitive and one or more neurobehavioral

Table 2
Factor analytic studies of delirium symptoms
Study n Population Instruments Findings
van der Mast [23] 36 Post-cardiotomy inpatients DRS Three-factor solution
Trzepacz and Dew [94] 20 General hospital inpatients DRS Two-factor solution
Trzepacz et al. [14] 18 and 43 Consecutive admissions to DRS Two-factor solution for both delirious
geriatric unit and delirious–demented populations
Camus et al. [95] 154 Psychogeriatric consultations Medical Confusion Scale Five-factor solution
Lawlor et al. [96] 56 Consecutive admissions to a MDAS Two-factor solution
palliative care unit
Grassi et al. [97] 105 Neuropsychiatric referrals of DRS Three-factor solution for DRS
cancer patients MDAS Two-factor solution for MDAS
Johansson et al. [98] 73 Postoperative hip fracture patients NEECHAM Three-factor solution
Saravay et al. [99] 109 Mixed delirium and dementia patients MMSE, DRS Two-factor solution
Blessed Dementia Rating Scale
Fann et al. [11] 64 Stem cell transplantation patients DRS Three-factor solution
MDAS
de Jonghe et al. [13] 92 Elderly general hospital patients Delirium-O-Meter (DOM) Two-factor solution for DOM
220 N. Gupta et al. / Journal of Psychosomatic Research 65 (2008) 215–222
factors. However, no single study has included a compre-
hensive assessment of the range of cognitive, neuropsychia-
tric, and behavioral symptoms that can occur, and as such,
existing studies may have oversimplified the factor structure
of delirium phenomenology.
Future directions
Phenomenological work is crucial to targeting studies of
causation, pathophysiology, treatment needs, and prog-
nosis. A decade ago, Meagher and Trzepacz [1] outlined a
plan for phenomenological studies of delirium and
although there has been progress, there remains a need
for studies that
1. document the course of individual delirium symptoms
with longitudinal studies.
2. delineate prodromal and subsyndromal concepts.
3. identify features that can assist detection across
different populations.
4. clarify the clinical relevance and stability of motor
subtypes with longitudinal studies.
5. identify correlates between symptom profile and
etiology, pathophysiology, treatment, and course.
6. explore the relevance of comorbidity (e.g., dementias)
and medication exposure.
7. investigate the impact of genetic factors on symptom
profile in non-alcohol-related delirium.
8. explore variations in presentation across different
patient populations, treatment settings, and cultures.
References
[1] Meagher DJ, Trzepacz PT. Delirium phenomenology illuminates
pathophysiology, management and course. J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol
1998;11:150–7.
[2] Trzepacz PT. Update on the neuropathogenesis of delirium. Dement
Geriatr Cogn Disord 1999;10:330–4.
[3] Trzepacz PT. Neuropathogenesis of delirium: a need to focus our
research. Psychosomatics 1994;35:374–91.
[4] Meagher DJ, Moran M, Raju B, Gibbons D, Donnelly S, Saunders
J, Trzepacz PT. Phenomenology of 100 consecutive adult cases of
delirium. Br J Psychiatry 2007;190:135–41.
[5] Webster R, Holroyd S. Prevalence of psychotic symptoms in delirium.
Psychosomatics 2000;41:519–22.
[6] Meagher DJ, O'Hanlon D, O'Mahony E, Casey PR, Trzepacz PT.
Relationship between symptoms and motoric subtype of delirium.
J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosc 2000;12:51–6.
[7] Cutting J. The phenomenology of acute organic psychosis: comparison
with acute schizophrenia. Br J Psychiatry 1987;151:324–32.
[8] Ross CA, Peyser CE, Shapiro I, et al. Delirium: phenomenologic and
etiologic subtypes. Int Psychogeriatr 1991;3:135–47.
[9] Treloar AJ, Macdonald AJ. Outcome of delirium: part 1. Outcome of
delirium diagnosed by DSM-III-R, ICD-10 and CAMDEX and
derivation of the Reversible Cognitive Dysfunction Scale among
acute geriatric inpatients. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 1997;12:609–13.
[10] Marcantonio ER, Simon SE, Bergmann MA, et al. Delirium symptoms
in post-acute care: prevalent, persistent, and associated with poor
functional recovery. JAGS 2003;51:4–9.
[11] Fann JR, Alfano CM, Burington BE, Roth-Roemer S, Katon WJ,
Syrjala KL. Clinical presentation of delirium in patients undergoing
hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Cancer 2005;103:810–20.
[12] Sirois F. Delirium: 100 cases. Can J Psychiatry 1988;33:375–8.
[13] de Jonghe JF, Kalisvaart KJ, Timmers JF, Kat MG, Jackson JC.
Delirium-O-Meter: a nurses' rating scale for monitoring delirium
severity in geriatric patients. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 2005;20:1158–66.
[14] Trzepacz PT, Mulsant BH, Dew MA, et al. Is delirium different when it
occurs in dementia? A study using the Delirium Rating Scale.
J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 1998;10:199–204.
[15] Cole M, McCusker J, Dendukuri N, Han L. Symptoms of
delirium among elderly medical inpatients with or without dementia.
J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 2002;14:167–75.
[16] Voyer P, Cole MG, McCusker J, Belzile E. Prevalence and symptoms
of delirium superimposed on dementia. Clin Nurs Res 2006;15:46–66.
[17] Rockwood K. The occurrence and duration of symptoms in elderly
patients with delirium. J Gerontol Med Sci 1993;48:M162–6.
[18] Turkel SB, Trzepacz PT, Tavare CJ. Comparison of delirium in adults
and children. Psychosomatics 2006;47:320–4.
[19] Leentjens AF, Schieveld JNM, Leonard M, Louseberg R, Verhey FRJ,
Meagher DJ. A comparison of the phenomenology of pediatric, adult,
and geriatric delirium. Psychosomatics 2008;64:219–23.
[20] Morita T, Tei Y, Tsunoda J, Inoue M, Chihara S. Underlying
pathologies and their associations with clinical features in terminal
delirium of cancer patients. J Pain Symptom Manage 2001;22:
997–1006.
[21] Wada Y, Yamaguchi N. Delirium in the elderly: relationship of clinical
symptoms to outcome. Dementia 1993;4:113–6.
[22] Rudberg MA, Pompei P, Foreman MD, Ross RE, Cassel CK. The
natural history of delirium in older hospitalized patients: a syndrome of
heterogeneity. Age Ageing 1997;26:169–74.
[23] van der Mast RC. Detecting and measuring the severity of delirium
with the symptom rating scale for delirium, In: Delirium after cardiac
surgery. Thesis, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Benecke Consultants,
Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1994, pp. 78–89.
[24] Laurila J. Phenomenology of delirium. University of Helsinki 2004.
Medical thesis, unpublished.
[25] Lipowski ZJ. Delirium. Acute confusional states. New York: Oxford
University Press, 1990.
[26] Marquis F, Ouimet S, Riker R, Cossette M, Skrobik Y. Individual
delirium symptoms: do they matter? Crit Care Med 2007;35:2533–7.
[27] Adamis D, Morrison C, Treloar A, MacDonald AJ, Martin FC. The
performance of the Clock Drawing Test in elderly medical inpatients:
does it have utility in the identification of delirium. J Ger Psychiatry
Neurol 2005;18:129–33.
[28] Trzepacz PT, Meagher DJ. Neuropsychiatric aspects of delirium.
In: Yudofsky SC, Hales RE, editors. The American Psychiatric
Publishing textbook of neuropsychiatry and behavioural neurosciences
—fifth edition. Arlington: American Psychiatric Publishing Inc.,
2007. pp. 445–518.
[29] Baranowski SL, Patten SB. The predictive value of dysgraphia and
constructional apraxia for delirium in psychiatric inpatients. Can J
Psychiatry 2000;45:75–8.
[30] Meagher DJ, Trzepacz PT. Motoric subtypes of delirium. Semin Clin
Neuropsychiatry 2000;5:76–86.
[31] Eriksson M, Samuelsson E, Gustafson Y, Aberg T, Engstrom KG.
Delirium after coronary bypass surgery evaluated by the organic brain
syndrome protocol. Scand Cardiovasc J 2002;36:250–5.
[32] Breitbart W, Tremblay A, Gibson C. An open trial of olanzapine for the
treatment of delirium in hospitalized cancer patients. Psychosomatics
2002;43:175–82.
[33] Leonard M, Spiller J, Keen J, MacLullich A, Kamholtz B, Meagher D.
Symptoms of depression and delirium assessed serially in palliative
care inpatients. Psychosomatics [in press].
[34] Meagher DJ, O'Hanlon D, O'Mahony E, Casey PR, Trzepacz PT.
Relationship between etiology and phenomenological profile in
delirium. J Geriatr Psychiatr Neurol 1998;11:146–9.
 N. Gupta et al. / Journal of Psychosomatic Research 65 (2008) 215–222
[35] Balan S, Leibowitz A. The relation between the clinical subtypes of
delirium and the urinary level of 6-SMT. J Neuropsychiatry Clin
Neurosci 2003;15:363–6.
[36] van der Cammen TJM, Tiemeier H, Engelhart MJ, Fekkes D.
Abnormal neurotransmitter metabolite levels in Alzheimer patients
with a delirium. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 2006;21:838–43.
[37] Inouye SK. The dilemma of delirium: clinical and research
controversies regarding diagnosis and evaluation of delirium in
hospitalized elderly medical patients. Am J Med 1994;7:278–88.
[38] Meagher DJ, O'Hanlon D, O'Mahony E, et al. Use of environmental
strategies and psychotropic medication in the management of delirium.
Br J Psychiatry 1996;168:512–5.
[39] Breitbart W, Gibson C, Tremblay A. The delirium experience: delirium
recall and delirium-related distress in hospitalized patients with cancer,
their spouses/caregivers, and their nurses. Psychosomatics 2002;43:
183–94.
[40] O'Keeffe ST, Lavan JN. Clinical significance of delirium subtypes in
older people. Age Ageing 1999;28:115–9.
[41] Liptzin B, Levkoff SE. An empirical study of delirium subtypes. Br J
Psychiatry 1992;161:843–5.
[42] Marcantonio E, Ta T, Duthie E, Resnick NM. Delirium severity and
psychomotor types: their relationship with outcomes after hip fracture
repair. J Am Geriatr Soc 2002;50:850–7.
[43] Olofsson SM, Weitzner MA, Valentine AD, et al. A retrospective study
of the psychiatric management and outcome of delirium in the cancer
patient. Support Care Cancer 1996;4:351–7.
[44] Kiely DK, Jones RN, Bergmann MA, Marcantonio ER. Association
between psychomotor activity delirium subtypes and mortality among
newly admitted postacute facility patients. J Gerontol Ser A Biol Sci
Med Sci 2007;62:174–9.
[45] Lipowski ZJ. Transient cognitive disorders (delirium, acute confu-
sional states) in the elderly. Am J Psychiatry 1983;140:1426–36.
[46] Lipowski ZJ. Delirium in the elderly patient. N Eng J Med 1989;320:
578–82.
[47] O'Keeffe ST. Clinical subtypes of delirium in the elderly. Dement
Geriatr Cogn Disord 1999;10:380–5.
[48] Breitbart W, Rosenfeld B, Roth A, Smith MJ, Cohen K, Passik S. The
Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale. J Pain Symptom Management
1997;13:128–37.
[49] Trzepacz PT, Baker RW, Greenhouse J. A symptom rating scale for
delirium. Psychiatry Res 1988;23:89–97.
[50] Trzepacz PT, Mittal D, Torres R, Kanary K, Norton J. Validation of the
Delirium Rating Scale-revised-98: comparison with the delirium rating
scale and the cognitive test for delirium. J Neuropsychiatry Clin
Neurosci 2001;13:229–42.
[51] Meagher D, Moran M, Raju B, et al. Motor symptoms in 100
consecutive cases of delirium vs. controls: comparison of subtyping
methods. Psychosomatics [in press].
[52] Leonard M, Godfrey A, Silberhorn M, et al. Motion analysis in
delirium: a novel method of clarifying motoric subtypes. Neurocase
2007;13:272–7.
[53] Levkoff SE, Liptzin B, Cleary PD, et al. Subsyndromal delirium. J Am
Geriatr Psychiatr 1996;4:320–9.
[54] Cole M, McCusker J, Dendukuri N, Han L. The prognostic
significance of subsyndromal delirium in elderly medical inpatients.
J Am Geriatr Soc 2003;51:754–60.
[55] Dosa D, Intrator O, McNicoll L, Cang Y, Teno J. Preliminary derivation
of a Nursing Home Confusion Assessment Method based on data from
the Minimum Data Set. J Am Geriatr Soc 2007;55:1099–105.
[56] Marcantonio ER, Kiely DK, Simon SE, et al. Outcomes of older people
admitted to postacute facilities with delirium. J Am Geriatr Soc
2005;53:963–9.
[57] Ouimet S, Riker R, Bergeron N, Cossette M, Kavanagh B, Skrobik Y.
Subsyndromal delirium in the ICU: evidence for a disease spectrum.
Intensive Care Med 2007;33:1007–13.
[58] Duppils GS, Wikblad K. Delirium: behavioural changes before and
during the prodromal phase. J Clin Nurs 2004;13:609–16.
221
[59] de Jonghe JF, Kalisvaart KJ, Dijkstra M, et al. Early symptoms in the
prodromal phase of delirium: a prospective cohort study in elderly
patients undergoing hip surgery. Am J Geriatr Psychiatr 2007;15:
112–21.
[60] Plaschke K, Hill H, Engelhardt R, et al. EEG changes and serum
anticholinergic activity measured in patients with delirium in the
intensive care unit. Anaesthesia 2007;62:1217–23.
[61] Thomas C, Hestermann U, Walther S, Pfueller U, et al. Prolonged
activation EEG differentiates dementia with and without delirium in
frail elderly patients. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2008;79:119–25.
[62] Inouye SK, van Dyck CH, Alessi CA, Balkin S, Siegal AP, Horwitz RI.
Clarifying confusion: the confusion assessment method. A new
method for detection of delirium. Ann Intern Med 1990;113:941–8.
[63] Albert MS, Levkoff SE, Reilly C, et al. The delirium symptom
interview: an interview for the detection of delirium symptoms in
hospitalized patients. J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol 1992;5:14–21.
[64] Neelon VJ, Champagne MT, Carlson JR, Funk SG. The NEECHAM
Confusion Scale: construction, validation, and clinical testing. Nurs
Res 1996;45:324–30.
[65] Hart RP, Levenson JL, Sessler CN, Best AM, Schwartz SM,
Rutherford LE. Validation of a cognitive test for delirium in medical
ICU patients. Psychosomatics 1996;37:533–46.
[66] Schuurmans MJ, Shortridge-Baggett LM, Duursma SA. The Delirium
Observation Screening Scale: a screening instrument for delirium. Res
Theory Nurs Pract 2003;17:31–50.
[67] Robertsson B, Karlsson I, Styrud E, Gottfries CG. Confusional State
Evaluation (CSE): an instrument for measuring severity of delirium in
the elderly. Br J Psychiatry 1997;170:565–70.
[68] McCusker J, Cole M, Bellavance F, Primeau F. Reliability and validity
of a new measure of severity of delirium. Int Psychogeriatr 1998;10:
421–33.
[69] McCusker J, Cole MG, Dendukuri N, Belzile E. The delirium index,
a measure of the severity of delirium: new findings on reliability,
validity, and responsiveness. J Am Geriatr Soc 2004;52:1744–9.
[70] Fick D, Agostini JV, Inouye SK. Delirium superimposed on dementia:
a systematic review. JAGS 2002;50:1723–32.
[71] Liptzin B, Levkoff SE, Gottlieb GL, Johnson JC. Delirium: back-
ground papers for DSM IV. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci
1993;5:154–60.
[72] Laurila JV, Pitkala KH, Strandberg TE, Tilvis RS. Detection and
documentation of dementia and delirium in acute geriatric wards. Gen
Hosp Psych 2004;26:31–5.
[73] Laurila JV, Pitkala KH, Strandberg TE, Tilvis RS. Impact of different
diagnostic criteria on prognosis of delirium: a prospective study.
Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 2004;18:240–4.
[74] McKeith I, Mintzer J, Aarsland D, Burn D, Chiu H, Cohen-Mansfield J,
Dickson D, Dubois B, Duda JE, Feldman H, Gauthier S, Halliday G,
Lawlor B, Lippa C, Lopez OL, Machado JC, O'Brien J, Playfer J, Reid
W. Dementia with Lewy bodies. Lancet Neurology 2004;3:19–28.
[75] Meagher D, Trzepacz PT. Phenomenological distinctions needed in
DSM-V: delirium, subsyndromal delirium, and dementias. J Neurop-
sychiatry Clin Neurosci 2007;19:468–70.
[76] Charlton BG, Kavanau JL. Delirium and psychotic symptoms—an
integrative model. Med Hypotheses 2002;58:24–7.
[77] Shigeta H, Yasui A, Nimura Y, et al. Postoperative delirium and
melatonin levels in elderly patients. Am J Surg 2001;182:449–54.
[78] Mori E, Yamadori A. Acute confusional state and acute agitated
delirium. Arch Neurol 1987;44:1139–43.
[79] Limosin F, Loze JY, Boni C, Fedeli LP, Hamon M, Rouillon F, Ades J,
Gorwood P. The A9 allele of the dopamine transporter gene increases
the risk of visual hallucinations during alcohol withdrawal in alcohol-
dependent women. Neurosci Lett 2004;362:91–4.
[80] Okubo T, Harada S, Higuchi S, Matsushita S. Investigation of
quantitative loci in the CCKAR gene with susceptibility to alcoholism.
Alcohol Clin Exp Res 2002;26(Suppl 8):2–5.
[81] Nakamura A, Inada T, Kitao Y, Katayama Y. Association between
catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) polymorphism and severe
222 N. Gupta et al. / Journal of Psychosomatic Research 65 (2008) 215–222
alcoholic withdrawal symptoms in male Japanese alcoholics. Addict
Biol 2001;6:233–8.
[82] Okubo T, Harada S, Higuchi S, Matsushita S. Association analyses
between polymorphisms of the phase II detoxification enzymes
(GSTM1, NQO1, NQO2) and alcohol withdrawal symptoms. Alcohol
Clin Exp Res 2003;27(8 Suppl):68S–71S.
[83] Ruiz-Chow A, Ramírez-Bermúdez J, Pérez-Neri I, Ríos C. Cere-
brospinal fluid homovanillic acid is correlated to psychotic features in
neurological patients with delirium. Gen Hosp Psych [in press].
[84] Platt MM, Breitbart W, Smith M, et al. Efficacy of neuroleptics for
hypoactive delirium. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 1994;6:66–7.
[85] Ito T, Okubo Y. Aripiprazole in the treatment of hypoactive subtype of
delirium with terminal cancer patients. Proceedings of the Academy of
Psychosomatic Medicine 54th Annual Meeting, 2007. New Research
Abstract 71 p. 31.
[86] Boettger S, Alici-Evcimen Y, Breitbart W, Passik S. Risperidone in the
treatment of hypoactive and hyperactive delirium. Proceedings of the
Academy of Psychosomatic Medicine 54th Annual Meeting, 2007.
New Research Abstract 66 p. 29.
[87] Meagher D, Leonard M. Active management of delirium across
treatment settings. Advances in Psychiatric Treatment [in press].
[88] Cole MG, McCusker J, Ciampi A, Dyachenko A. An exploratory study
of diagnostic criteria for delirium in older medical inpatients. J
Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 2007;19:151–6.
[89] Matsushima E, Nakajima K, Moriya H, Matsuura M, Motomiya T,
Kojima T. A psychophysiological study of the development of delirium
in coronary care units. Biol Psychiatry 1997;41:1211–7.
[90] Bosisio M, Caraceni A, Grassi L. Phenomenology of delirium in
cancer patients, as described by the Memorial Delirium Assessment
Scale (MDAS) and the Delirium Rating Scale (DRS). Psychosomatics
2006;47:471–8.
[91] World Health Organization. Mental and behavioral disorders (F00-
F99). The International Classification of Diseases, 10th rev.: ICD-10.
Geneva: World Health Organization, 1992.
[92] American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of
mental disorders, 4th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric
Association; 1994.
[93] Leonard M, Donnelly S, Conroy M, Saunders J, Trzepacz P, Meagher
D. A longitudinal study of phenomenological profile in delirium.
Proceedings of European Delirium Association Second Annual
meeting, 2007. www.europeandeliriumassociation.com.
[94] Trzepacz PT, Dew MA. Further analyses of the Delirium Rating Scale.
Gen Hosp Psych 1995;17:75–9.
[95] Camus V, Burtin B, Simeone I, et al. Factor analysis supports evidence
of existing hyperactive and hypoactive subtypes of delirium. Int J
Geriatr Psychiatry 2000;115:313–6.
[96] Lawlor PG, Nekolaichuk C, Gagnon B, Mancini IL, Pereira JL,
Bruera ED. Clinical utility, factor analysis, and further validation of
the Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale in patients with advanced
cancer: assessing delirium in advanced cancer. Cancer 2000;88:
2859–67.
[97] Grassi L, Caraceni A, Beltrami E, Borreani C, Zamorani M, Maltoni
M, Monti M, Luzzani M, Mercadante S, De Conno F. Assessing
delirium in cancer patients: the Italian versions of the Delirium Rating
Scale and the Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale. J Pain Symptom
Manage 2001;21:59–68.
[98] Johansson IS, Hamrin EK, Larsson G. Psychometric testing of the
NEECHAM Confusion Scale among patients with hip fracture. Res
Nurs Health 2002;25:203–11.
[99] Saravay SM, Kaplowitz M, Kurek J, et al. How do delirium and
dementia increase length of stay of elderly general medical inpatients.
Psychosomatics 2004;45:235–42.