Highlight
In this multi-site retrospective cohort of 2,827 adults aged 65 years or older, delirium was present in 16.0% of emergency department encounters, confirming that altered acute cognition is common at the front door of hospital care.
Delirium was not confined to patients later hospitalized. Although prevalence reached 27.3% among admitted patients, 7.9% of all patients discharged from the ED also had delirium, emphasizing a clinically important group at risk for missed recognition and unsafe transitions.
Independent risk factors included older age, dementia, greater comorbidity burden, arrival from a facility, and higher ED acuity. Delirium independently predicted hospital admission and was associated with increased 30-day readmission.
Management patterns reflected both supportive and potentially harmful responses: patients with delirium more often received restraints, psychoactive medications, and constant observation, but also safety precautions, family involvement, goals-of-care discussions, and palliative care consultation.
Background and Clinical Burden
Delirium is an acute disturbance in attention, awareness, and cognition that develops over a short period and tends to fluctuate. In older adults, it is among the most clinically consequential syndromes encountered in acute care. Delirium is associated with functional decline, prolonged hospitalization, institutionalization, higher mortality, and substantial distress for patients, caregivers, and staff. Yet despite its clinical importance, delirium often remains underrecognized in the emergency department.
The ED is a uniquely challenging environment for delirium care. Patients arrive with undifferentiated illness, time pressures are intense, collateral history may be limited, and the sensory environment can worsen confusion. Older adults with infection, dehydration, pain, medication effects, metabolic disturbance, or exacerbation of chronic disease may present with subtle cognitive change rather than a classic complaint. In practice, delirium may be mislabeled as dementia, behavioral disturbance, psychiatric disease, or “altered mental status” without formal characterization.
Prior studies have suggested that delirium in older ED patients is common, but estimates vary depending on case definition, population, and ascertainment method. Data are also limited regarding how delirium is actually managed in routine emergency care and how it relates to downstream utilization outcomes, especially in diverse health-system populations. This study by Sinvani and colleagues addresses that gap with a large cohort drawn from three distinct EDs in a New York metropolitan integrated health system.
Study Design
This was a multi-site retrospective cohort study including 2,827 older adult patients aged 65 years or above who presented to three diverse emergency departments within a single integrated health system. The investigators identified delirium through a rigorous chart-review approach that required evidence of acute change from baseline, an important methodological strength because delirium cannot be reliably inferred from confusion alone or from chronic cognitive impairment.
The analysis was stratified according to control and intervention periods of a parent delirium screening trial. Although the abstract does not detail the screening intervention itself, this stratification was intended to account for temporal differences in recognition or management practices across study phases.
The principal objectives were fourfold: first, to estimate delirium prevalence in older adults presenting to the ED; second, to identify independent patient-level risk factors associated with delirium; third, to characterize management strategies used in the ED; and fourth, to examine hospital utilization outcomes, including admission and 30-day readmission. Modified Poisson regression was used to identify independent risk factors for ED delirium and hospital admission, yielding adjusted relative risks rather than odds ratios, which are often easier to interpret when outcomes are not rare.
Key Findings
Prevalence of Delirium in the ED
The overall prevalence of ED delirium was 16.0%, with a 95% confidence interval of 14.6% to 17.4%. In practical terms, this means roughly 1 in 6 older adults presenting to the ED had delirium. Notably, this prevalence was consistent across study periods and across the three participating sites, suggesting that delirium is a stable and system-wide problem rather than an artifact of a specific location or workflow.
Among patients who were hospitalized, delirium prevalence was 27.3%, reinforcing its association with illness severity and complexity. However, one of the most clinically important observations was that 7.9% of all discharged patients also had delirium. This finding matters because discharge decisions often assume a level of cognitive stability and self-management capacity that delirious patients may not possess. Even when discharge is medically reasonable, delirium may compromise medication adherence, symptom reporting, fall prevention, and follow-up.
Independent Risk Factors
The study identified several independent predictors of ED delirium. Advanced age carried an adjusted relative risk of 1.01, likely reflecting a modest but cumulative increase in risk with each additional year. Dementia was a particularly strong predictor, with an adjusted relative risk of 3.10, consistent with longstanding evidence that preexisting cognitive impairment is one of the most potent predisposing factors for delirium.
Higher comorbidity burden, measured by the Charlson Comorbidity Index, was also associated with delirium, with an adjusted relative risk of 1.06. Arrival from a facility conferred increased risk as well, with an adjusted relative risk of 1.28. This likely reflects a more medically complex and functionally vulnerable population, as well as the possibility of baseline cognitive impairment or recent illness. ED acuity showed one of the strongest associations: patients in the highest acuity group had an adjusted relative risk of 3.85 for delirium. This is biologically and clinically plausible, because physiologic stress, organ dysfunction, infection, hypoxemia, and hemodynamic instability are well-recognized precipitants.
Management Strategies in Routine Emergency Care
The study provides a useful window into real-world ED management of delirium. Compared with patients without delirium, those with delirium were significantly more likely to receive physical restraints, psychoactive medications, and constant observation. These findings likely reflect the practical realities of caring for agitated or unsafe patients in crowded emergency environments. However, they also raise concerns, because restraints and sedating medications can worsen delirium, increase immobility, and create additional safety risks when not used judiciously.
At the same time, delirious patients were more likely to receive supportive and patient-centered measures, including safety precautions, family involvement, and palliative care consultation. The mention of goals-of-care discussions and palliative input is especially notable. Delirium in older adults often signals acute vulnerability and may coexist with advanced frailty, dementia, or serious chronic illness. In selected patients, it can serve as a trigger for broader discussions about prognosis, treatment intensity, and care priorities.
Even so, the authors note that supportive strategies remained underutilized. This is a key translational point. Best-practice delirium care generally emphasizes orientation, hearing and vision aids, hydration, sleep preservation, mobilization, avoidance of unnecessary lines and restraints, and engagement of family or caregivers. The fact that restrictive measures were common while supportive measures were less consistently applied suggests an implementation gap rather than a knowledge gap alone.
Hospital Utilization Outcomes
Delirium independently predicted hospital admission, with an adjusted relative risk of 1.54. This is clinically intuitive. Delirium often indicates serious underlying pathology, need for monitoring, and concern about decision-making capacity or safe disposition. Yet the finding remains important because it confirms that delirium carries prognostic and operational significance beyond age, comorbidity, or acuity alone.
The study also found higher 30-day readmissions among patients with delirium: 19% versus 13% in those without delirium, with a p value of 0.002. This suggests that delirium is not merely a transient ED phenomenon but a marker of ongoing vulnerability across the care continuum. Readmission risk may reflect unresolved precipitating illness, persistent cognitive impairment, medication complications, poor care transitions, or inadequate post-discharge support.
Clinical Interpretation
This study reinforces several clinically important messages. First, delirium in older ED patients is common enough that a strategy based on clinician suspicion alone is unlikely to be sufficient. Emergency clinicians routinely care for older adults with pain, infection, falls, weakness, dyspnea, or nonspecific symptoms; among these patients, altered cognition may be subtle and fluctuating. A prevalence of 16% strongly argues for standardized delirium screening or, at minimum, structured case finding in high-risk groups.
Second, delirium should influence disposition planning even when the immediate medical issue appears manageable. The observation that nearly 8% of discharged patients had delirium suggests that discharge workflows need stronger cognitive and caregiver safeguards. These might include confirming baseline mental status with family, documenting decision-making capacity, reviewing medications carefully, arranging rapid follow-up, and providing explicit return precautions tailored to caregivers as well as patients.
Third, the study highlights tension between containment and support in delirium management. In emergency practice, agitation can lead rapidly to restraints or psychoactive medication use. Sometimes these measures are necessary for immediate safety, particularly when patients are at risk of harming themselves or interfering with essential treatment. However, evidence and guidelines generally favor nonpharmacologic strategies first whenever feasible, reserving medications for severe distress or dangerous agitation and avoiding routine benzodiazepine use except in specific settings such as alcohol withdrawal.
Expert Commentary and Context Within the Literature
The findings are broadly consistent with prior literature showing that delirium in the ED is prevalent, underdetected, and prognostically important. International and US guidance has increasingly emphasized delirium prevention, early recognition, and multicomponent nonpharmacologic management in hospitalized older adults. The ED has lagged behind inpatient settings in protocolized implementation, in part because of workflow constraints and the historical focus on rapid stabilization rather than geriatric syndromes.
The strong association with dementia deserves particular emphasis. Dementia and delirium frequently coexist, and distinguishing the two is one of the central diagnostic challenges in acute care. Dementia is a chronic decline from prior baseline; delirium is an acute change, often fluctuating, superimposed on baseline function. In busy emergency settings, the absence of collateral history is a major barrier. This study’s requirement for evidence of acute change from baseline is therefore a methodological strength and aligns with the core diagnostic principle of delirium assessment.
The study also supports a shift in how health systems view delirium operationally. Delirium is not only a neurologic or psychiatric concern; it is a systems issue spanning emergency medicine, hospital medicine, geriatrics, nursing, palliative care, and transitional care. Its association with admission and readmission means that better delirium recognition may improve not only clinical outcomes but also resource utilization and quality metrics.
Strengths and Limitations
The study has several notable strengths. It includes a large sample size, spans three diverse EDs, and uses a validated in-depth chart review method requiring evidence of acute change from baseline. It also examines practical management patterns and downstream utilization outcomes, making the work highly relevant to frontline clinicians and health-system leaders.
Its retrospective design, however, imposes important limitations. Chart review is only as good as the documentation available. Delirium may still have been missed if clinicians failed to note fluctuating cognition or if collateral baseline information was absent. Conversely, management measures such as family involvement or supportive precautions may have been underdocumented. Residual confounding is also possible despite multivariable adjustment. The integrated health-system setting improves consistency but may limit generalizability to other regions, staffing models, or ED environments.
Another limitation is that the abstract does not provide granular detail on delirium subtype, screening tool performance, or the specific parent trial intervention. Hypoactive delirium, in particular, is often underrecognized and may carry different management implications than hyperactive presentations. Additional information on adverse events, mortality, or functional outcomes would further strengthen clinical interpretation.
Implications for Practice
For emergency departments caring for large numbers of older adults, several practical implications emerge from this study. First, systematic delirium identification should be prioritized, especially for patients with dementia, high acuity, multiple comorbidities, or arrival from a facility. Second, care pathways should include nonpharmacologic supportive measures early, not only after agitation escalates. Third, discharge planning for patients with delirium must be more deliberate, with caregiver engagement and careful reassessment of safety.
Health systems may also consider integrating delirium-sensitive workflows into geriatric ED programs, nursing assessment templates, electronic alerts for high-risk patients, and staff education on de-escalation and restraint avoidance. Because delirium predicts readmission, coordination with inpatient teams, primary care, home health, and post-acute facilities may be especially important after discharge or transfer.
Funding and ClinicalTrials.gov
The abstract provided does not report funding details or a ClinicalTrials.gov registration number for this retrospective cohort analysis. The study was conducted in the context of a parent delirium screening trial, but the registration identifier is not included in the citation information available here.
Conclusion
This study delivers a clear and clinically meaningful message: delirium is common in older adults presenting to the emergency department, extends beyond those who are admitted, and signals higher short-term hospital utilization. Roughly 1 in 6 older ED patients had delirium, and nearly 1 in 13 discharged patients were affected. Dementia, comorbidity, facility arrival, and high acuity marked particularly vulnerable groups.
Current management appears mixed, combining safety-oriented supportive practices with frequent use of restrictive interventions that may themselves worsen outcomes if overused. The findings support broader implementation of standardized delirium screening, stronger nonpharmacologic management pathways, and more cautious discharge processes for cognitively vulnerable older adults. For clinicians, the take-home point is straightforward: delirium in the ED is neither rare nor benign, and recognizing it should meaningfully change how older patients are evaluated, managed, and transitioned across care settings.
References
1. Sinvani L, Nelson S, Perrin A, Islam S, Sison C, Slotnick S, Chua V, Porreca K, Barnaby DP, Kwiatek S, Cary K, Garg N, Sud P, Makhnevich A. Delirium in Older Adults Presenting to the Emergency Department: Prevalence, Risk Factors, Management Strategies, and Hospital Utilization Outcomes. Journal of General Internal Medicine. 2026 Jun 2. PMID: 42230527.
2. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-5-TR). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Association; 2022.
3. Inouye SK, Westendorp RGJ, Saczynski JS. Delirium in elderly people. Lancet. 2014;383(9920):911-922.
4. American Geriatrics Society Expert Panel on Postoperative Delirium in Older Adults. American Geriatrics Society abstracted clinical practice guideline for postoperative delirium in older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2015;63(1):142-150.
5. Han JH, Wilson A, Vasilevskis EE, et al. Diagnosing delirium in older emergency department patients: validity and reliability of the Delirium Triage Screen and the Brief Confusion Assessment Method. Ann Emerg Med. 2013;62(5):457-465.
6. Geriatric Emergency Department Guidelines. American College of Emergency Physicians, American Geriatrics Society, Emergency Nurses Association, and Society for Academic Emergency Medicine. Ann Emerg Med. 2014;63(5):e7-e25.