Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 62 out of 100. Clinical safety

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Background Delirium is common among hospitalized elders and may persist for months. Therefore, the adverse impact of delirium on independence often occurs in the post acute care (PAC) setting. The effect of psychomotor subtypes on delirium remains uncertain. The purpose of this study is to examine the association between psychomotor activity delirium subtypes and 1-year mortality among 457 newly admitted delirious PAC patients. Methods Patients were screened for delirium on admission to PAC facilities after an acute hospitalization, and patients with "Confusion Assessment Method"-defined delirium were enrolled. Psychomotor activity was assessed using the Memorial Delirium Assessment Scale, and patients were classified as to their delirium subtype (hyperactive, hypoactive, mixed, or normal). One-year mortality data were obtained from the National Death Index. A Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and a proportional hazards analysis using indicator (dummy) variables with normal psychomotor activity as the referent were performed. Results The normal psychomotor activity group had the lowest 1-year mortality rate, followed by the hyperactive, mixed, then hypoactive groups in increasing order. Independent of age, gender, comorbidity, dementia, and delirium severity, hypoactive patients were 1.60 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09-2.35) times more likely to die during the 1-year follow-up period than were patients with normal psychomotor activity. The hyperactive (hazard ratio = 1.30; 95% CI, 0.73-2.31) and mixed (hazard ratio = 1.25; 95% CI, 0.72-2.17) psychomotor groups had nonsignificant elevated risks relative to the normal psychomotor behavior group. Conclusions All three psychomotor disturbance subtypes had an elevated risk of dying during the 1-year follow-up relative to the normal psychomotor group, though the hypoactive group had the highest mortality risk and was the only group with a statistically significantly elevated risk relative to the normal group.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 62/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 11 of 12; Strength of evidence 1 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 1 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration 2 of 3; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. 38 of the 61 points it could be judged on, which is 62 of 100. Total 62 of 100.38 of the 61 points we could judge = 62 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a randomised controlled trial. Scored zero for sample size and effect reported because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record and institution's track record, so those were left out: it earned 38 of the 61 points we could judge it on, which is 62 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences)
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design 11 / 12 A randomised controlled trial (from PubMed type “Randomized Controlled Trial”)
Strength of evidence 1 / 5 Rated “low” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 1 / 5 2007 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 0 / 4 Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Effect reported 0 / 3 No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people 3 / 3 Studied in people (pubmed indexes it as a clinical or observational study)
Randomised / blinded 1 / 2 Randomised (as stated in the record)
Times cited — / 7 No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score
Citations per year — / 5 No citation count or no year — left out of this score
Impact for its field and year — / 6 No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score
Cited by studies here — / 6 Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score
Still being cited — / 4 No yearly citation counts — left out of this score
Senior author's track record — / 4 Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record — / 3 No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multi-centre collaboration 2 / 3 PubMed indexes it as a multicentre study
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 17339642)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 38 / 61 Scored on 12 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 38 of the 61 points we could judge it on is 62 out of 100.
Total 62 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

APA 7th

Kiely, D. K., Jones, R. N., Bergmann, M. A., & Marcantonio, E. R. (2007). Association between psychomotor activity delirium subtypes and mortality among newly admitted post-acute facility patients. The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences. https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/62.2.174

Vancouver

Kiely DK, Jones RN, Bergmann MA, Marcantonio ER. Association between psychomotor activity delirium subtypes and mortality among newly admitted post-acute facility patients. The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences. 2007. doi:10.1093/gerona/62.2.174. PMID: 17339642.

BibTeX

@article{kiely2007-17339642,
  author  = {Kiely, D. K. and Jones, R. N. and Bergmann, M. A. and Marcantonio, E. R.},
  title   = {{Association between psychomotor activity delirium subtypes and mortality among newly admitted post-acute facility patients}},
  journal = {The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences},
  year    = {2007},
  doi     = {10.1093/gerona/62.2.174},
  pmid    = {17339642},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/62.2.174}
}

Related studies in Clinical safety

Similar studies

More on Clinical safety

See all studies in Clinical safety →