How can I differentiate delirium from altered mental status in hospitalized older adults?

  • Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine
  • October 2026,
  • 93
  • (10)
  • 581-585;
  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.3949/ccjm.93a.26025

In hospital settings, bedside screening tools can be used to distinguish delirium from other causes of altered mental status, enabling timely care and reducing costs.

Altered mental status is an intentionally nonspecific clinical term describing any changes from a patient’s baseline level of cognition or behavior. It broadly describes cognitive or behavioral changes due to medical or psychiatric causes, including conditions such as dementia, depression, psychosis, metabolic encephalopathy, substance intoxication or withdrawal, and central nervous system insults.1,2

Delirium is a subtype of altered mental status characterized by acute disturbances in attention, consciousness, and cognition. It is typically precipitated by illness, hospitalization, medication effects, or alcohol withdrawal.1 Because delirium often is not recognized and is associated with increased mortality, prolonged intensive care unit stays, and higher healthcare costs, rapid, cost-effective differentiation in hospitalized older adults is essential.2

MAGNITUDE OF PROBLEM, COSTS OF MISSED DELIRIUM

Delirium is substantially underdiagnosed in geriatric patients. In a study that included 2,115 hospitalized patients age 70 to 74, the incidence of delirium based on retrospective chart review was more than 9 times higher than the incidence based on discharge coding.3

Missed delirium increases downstream utilization and costs, with excess intensive care costs of $17,838 per patient within 30 days and an estimated annual national burden exceeding $164 billion.2,4

About 18% of the US population is 65 or older, and this proportion is projected to exceed 20% by 2030.5,6 Geriatric patients are particularly susceptible to delirium due to age-related reductions in cholinergic neurotransmission, underlying microstructural brain changes, and impaired cerebral autoregulation.2 Data indicate that 8% to 17% of geriatric patients in emergency departments and 40% of nursing home residents experience delirium.2

Delirium is misdiagnosed as psychiatric illness in up to 65% of cases,7 delaying treatment of reversible causes and increasing mortality (associated mortality rate 10%–65%) and cognitive decline.8 Hypoactive and fluctuating presentations further contribute to missed delirium cases in the emergency department, with a prospective study finding a 30.8% increase in 6-month mortality in patients whose delirium was not detected.9

Other studies show that untreated delirium is associated with increased morbidity and mortality, with mortality 5.23 times higher during admission, 2.72 times higher at 12 months, and 3.34 times higher at 5 years.10 Patients with delirium have longer hospital stays and ventilator time, higher rates of complications, and increased likelihood of discharge to long-term-care facilities.2 On the other hand, prompt recognition and treatment of delirium reduces morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs.11

DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS

Delirium has an acute onset with fluctuating impairments in consciousness, attention, and cognition, often triggered by illness or hospitalization.1,11 In contrast, dementia develops insidiously, attention and orientation generally are preserved in depression and psychosis, metabolic encephalopathy lacks characteristic fluctuation, substance-related altered mental status follows a predictable set of symptoms, and central nervous system insults produce focal deficits.1,2,7

Table 1 summarizes key differences between delirium and other types of altered mental status.1,7,11,12 Figure 1 presents a practical bedside approach to rapidly and cost-effectively assessing older adults for delirium in emergency, hospital, or intensive-care settings.1,11,13–18

View this table:
TABLE 1

Key similarities and differences between delirium and other causes of altered mental status

Figure 1

Flowchart to efficiently distinguish delirium from other forms of altered mental status.

CAM = Confusion Assessment Method; CAM-ICU = Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit; DRS-R-98 = Delirium Rating–Scale Revised-98; IQCODE = Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly

Based on information from references 1, 11, and 13–18.

INITIAL WORKUP

Etiologies of delirium and other forms of altered mental status may overlap, so a basic workup should include a detailed history and physical examination, complete blood cell count, comprehensive metabolic panel including renal and liver panels, urinalysis, and electrocardiography.1 These tests yield results quickly, allowing for earlier intervention. A basic workup typically costs between $10 and $60 per individual; however, bundled emergency department workups may exceed $100 to $200.19

A thorough review of recent medication changes, including prescription and over-the-counter drugs, should be conducted to quickly identify triggers or exacerbating factors for altered mental status.1,11 Detailed substance use history from corroborating sources must be completed to evaluate all possible causes of altered mental status and guide effective intervention.1,11

Imaging usually is an unnecessary expense, but computed tomography of the head is indicated when there is trauma history or new focal deficits are present. Median costs are estimated at $400 to $450, but there is substantial variability driven by facility-related charges.1,11,20

SCREENING FOR DELIRIUM

When delirium is suspected, the course of changes in consciousness, attention, and cognition should be assessed (Figure 1).

Consciousness

The Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) and Richmond Agitation–Sedation Scale (RASS) are simple, cost-efficient bedside tools that provide reliable assessment of consciousness and sedation status, helping identify patients appropriate for delirium screening. They can be administered rapidly, typically taking less than 2 minutes and less than 30 seconds to complete, respectively, do not require specialized equipment, and are supported by freely available scoring resources.13,14 The GCS assesses consciousness based on motor and eye and verbal responses and should be used in initial evaluation of altered mental status.21

In intensive-care settings, sedation level should be assessed before the delirium evaluation. The bedside RASS has demonstrated strong interrater reliability (weighted kappa 0.91) and has been shown to correctly identify fluctuations in levels of consciousness over time (P < .001).22 Patients with a RASS score of 3 or greater are considered alert enough to undergo assessment for delirium with the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU), as discussed below.22

Attention

Bedside direct attentional tasks quickly and cost-efficiently operationalize attention, allowing the clinician to assess memory and executive function. Patients with delirium demonstrate significantly poorer performance on the following bedside tests of attention compared with those without delirium (P < .001)15:

  • Digit span (forward and backward number repetition assessing immediate attention and working memory)

  • Serial 7s subtraction (repeated subtraction from 100 assessing sustained attention and concentration)

  • Vigilance “A” test (detection of target letters within a spoken sequence assessing sustained attention)

  • Months of the year backward (MOTYB, reverse recitation assessing divided and sustained attention)

  • Global clinical subjective rating of attention (clinician judgment during brief conversation).

In particular, MOTYB combined with global clinical rating yields the best performance, correctly classifying 85.5% of Confusion Assessment Method (CAM)–defined delirium cases.15 These tasks are designed to take less than 2 minutes, require no special training or equipment, and reduce reliance on expensive diagnostics.15

Cognitive course

CAM-ICU is the standard diagnostic bedside tool for delirium in the intensive-care setting. It enables rapid assessment of acute onset and fluctuating course without requiring verbal responses, while also further evaluating attention. CAM-ICU typically takes 1 to 2 minutes to administer and has no added equipment costs.12 Alternatively, the standard CAM may be used in non–intensive care settings and relies more on verbal interaction to detect delirium23; it takes 5 to 10 minutes to administer.16

Additional tools can further establish baseline cognitive function for distinguishing acute cognitive change in delirium from dementia. The Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (IQCODE) has shown excellent sensitivity (0.91) and specificity (0.93) in detecting dementia, and can aid in triaging cognitive impairments and reduce unnecessary diagnostic testing in older adults.17 IQCODE typically takes 5 to 7 minutes to complete, requires no proprietary materials, and has minimal labor and training costs.

The Delirium Rating Scale–Revised-98 (DRS-R-98) was also shown to provide both criteria-based diagnosis and a continuous severity score, which helps clinicians track symptom burden over time.12 The DRS-R-98 takes about 20 to 30 minutes to administer and does not require proprietary materials; however, it is a more comprehensive assessment tool and is best suited for quantifying delirium severity rather than for rapid bedside screening.18

THE BOTTOM LINE

GCS and RASS provide reliable and cost-efficient assessment of consciousness and sedation status, helping identify patients appropriate for delirium screening. Brief, low-cost attention tasks, particularly MOTYB combined with clinical judgment during brief conversation, can rapidly and cost-efficiently identify delirium. CAM-ICU enables rapid identification of acute delirium in the intensive-care setting, while IQCODE and DRS-R-98 help distinguish baseline dementia and quantify delirium severity.

Standardized, ongoing assessment is essential once delirium is identified. In the intensive-care setting, daily use of tools such as CAM-ICU is recommended to guide management,24 while in non–intensive-care settings brief attention tasks (standard CAM and MOTYB), repeated clinical assessment of attention and cognition, or the DRS-R-98 for delirium severity should be used to ensure timely recognition of clinical changes.

DISCLOSURES

The authors report no relevant financial relationships which, in the context of their contributions, could be perceived as a potential conflict of interest.

REFERENCES

  1. 1
    ↵
    LaHue SC, Douglas VC. Approach to altered mental status and inpatient delirium. Neurol Clin 2022; 40(1):45–57. doi:10.1016/j.ncl.2021.08.004
  2. 2
    ↵
    Inouye SK, Westendorp RG, Saczynski JS. Delirium in elderly people. Lancet 2014; 383(9920):911–922. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60688-1
  3. 3
    ↵
    Titlestad I, Haugarvoll K, Solvang SH, et al. Delirium is frequently underdiagnosed among older hospitalised patients despite available information in hospital medical records. Age Ageing 2024; 53(2):afae006. doi:10.1093/ageing/afae006
  4. 4
    ↵
    Vasilevskis EE, Chandrasekhar R, Holtze CH, et al. The cost of ICU delirium and coma in the intensive care unit patient. Med Care 2018; 56(10):890–897. doi:10.1097/MLR.0000000000000975
  5. 5
    ↵
    Vespa J, Medina L, Armstrong D; United States Census Bureau. Demographic Turning Points for the United States: Population Projections for 2020 to 2060. Updated February 2020. www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2020/demo/p25-1144.pdf. Accessed September 11, 2026.
  6. 6
    ↵
    United States Census Bureau. National Population by Characteristics: 2020–2024. Updated June 15, 2026. www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/popest/2020s-national-detail.html. Accessed September 11, 2026.
  7. 7
    ↵
    Hercus C, Hudaib AR. Delirium misdiagnosis risk in psychiatry: a machine learning-logistic regression predictive algorithm. BMC Health Serv Res 2020; 20(1):151. doi:10.1186/s12913-020-5005-1
  8. 8
    ↵
    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; 97(3):278–288. doi:10.1016/0002-9343(94)90011-6
  9. 9
    ↵
    Kakuma R, du Fort GG, Arsenault L, et al. Delirium in older emergency department patients discharged home: effect on survival. J Am Geriatr Soc 2003; 51(4):443–450. doi:10.1046/j.1532-5415.2003.51151.x
  10. 10
    ↵
    Pérez-Ros P, Plaza-Ortega N, Martínez-Arnau FM. Mortality risk following delirium in older inpatients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Worldviews Evid Based Nurs 2025; 22(3):e70027. doi:10.1111/wvn.70027
  11. 11
    ↵
    Wilber ST, Ondrejka JE. Altered mental status and delirium. Emerg Med Clin North Am 2016; 34(3):649–665. doi:10.1016/j.emc.2016.04.012
  12. 12
    ↵
    Grover S, Avasthi A. Clinical practice guidelines for management of delirium in elderly. Indian J Psychiatry 2018; 60(suppl 3):S329–S340. doi:10.4103/0019-5545.224473
  13. 13
    ↵
    Han JH, Vasilevskis EE, Schnelle JF, et al. The diagnostic performance of the Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale for detecting delirium in older emergency department patients. Acad Emerg Med 2015; 22(7):878–882. doi:10.1111/acem.12706
  14. 14
    ↵
    Bodien YG, Katz DI, Schiff ND, Giacino JT. Behavioral assessment of patients with disorders of consciousness. Semin Neurol 2022; 42(3):249–258. doi:10.1055/s-0042-1756298
  15. 15
    ↵
    Adamis D, Meagher D, Murray O, et al. Evaluating attention in delirium: a comparison of bedside tests of attention. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2016; 16(9):1028–1035. doi:10.1111/ggi.12592
  16. 16
    ↵
    Green JR, Smith J, Teale E, et al. Use of the confusion assessment method in multicentre delirium trials: training and standardisation. BMC Geriatr 2019; 19(1):107. Published April 15, 2019. doi:10.1186/s12877-019-1129-8
  17. 17
    ↵
    Jackson TA, MacLullich AM, Gladman JR, Lord JM, Sheehan B. Diagnostic test accuracy of informant-based tools to diagnose dementia in older hospital patients with delirium: a prospective cohort study. Age Ageing 2016; 45(4):505–511. doi:10.1093/ageing/afw065
  18. 18
    ↵
    Jones RN, Cizginer S, Pavlech L, et al. Assessment of instruments for measurement of delirium severity: a systematic review. JAMA Intern Med 2019; 179(2):231–239. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.6975
  19. 19
    ↵
    Lin T, Margo CE. Cost comparisons of physician-ordered versus direct-to-consumer laboratory testing. Cureus 2024; 16(11):e74173. doi:10.7759/cureus.74173
  20. 20
    ↵
    Philips AP, Whaley C. Commercial price variation for common imaging studies. Health Aff Sch 2025; 3(5):qxaf092. doi:10.1093/haschl/qxaf092
  21. 21
    ↵
    Hunt IE, Wittenberg BE, Kennamer B, et al. A retrospective review of the timing of Glasgow Coma Scale documentation in a trauma database: implications for patient care, research, and performance metrics. World Neurosurg 2022; 163:e559–e564. doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2022.04.019
  22. 22
    ↵
    Ely EW, Truman B, Shintani A, et al. Monitoring sedation status over time in ICU patients: reliability and validity of the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS). JAMA 2003; 289(22):2983–2991. doi:10.1001/jama.289.22.2983
  23. 23
    ↵
    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(12):941–948. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-113-12-941
  24. 24
    ↵
    Seidna Hamid SH, Abd El-Raheem GOH, Salih Elamin HE, Ahmed Abdallah MM. Delirium management and current practice among intensive care units doctors, Khartoum. F1000Res 2025; 13:456. doi:10.12688/f1000research.142233.4
Loading
Loading
  • Share

Subjects