Suscribirse

Prospective comparison of three validated prediction rules for prognosis in community-acquired pneumonia - 21/08/11

Doi : 10.1016/j.amjmed.2005.01.006 
Drahomir Aujesky, MD, MSc a, d, , Thomas E. Auble, PhD b, Donald M. Yealy, MD b, Roslyn A. Stone, PhD c, d, D. Scott Obrosky, MSc a, d, Thomas P. Meehan, MD, MPH e, f, Louis G. Graff, MD e, g, h, Jonathan M. Fine, MD i, Michael J. Fine, MD, MSc a, d
a Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine 
b Department of Emergency Medicine 
c Department of Biostatistics, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh 
d VA Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion and VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System 
e Qualidigm 
f Yale University School of Medicine 
g Department of Traumatology and Emergency Medicine, University of Connecticut School of Medicine 
h Department of Emergency Medicine, New Britain General Hospital 
i Section of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Norwalk Hospital 

Requests for reprints should be addressed to Drahomir Aujesky, MD, MSc, Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Building #28 Suite 1A129, University Drive C, Pittsburgh, PA 15240

Abstract

Purpose

We assessed the performance of 3 validated prognostic rules in predicting 30-day mortality in community-acquired pneumonia: the 20 variable Pneumonia Severity Index and the easier to calculate CURB (confusion, urea nitrogen, respiratory rate, blood pressure) and CURB-65 severity scores.

Subjects and methods

We prospectively followed 3181 patients with community-acquired pneumonia from 32 hospital emergency departments (January–December 2001) and assessed mortality 30 days after initial presentation. Patients were stratified into Pneumonia Severity Index risk classes (I–V) and CURB (0–4) and CURB-65 (0–5) risk strata. We compared the discriminatory power (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve) of these rules to predict mortality and their accuracy based on sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and likelihood ratios.

Results

The Pneumonia Severity Index (risk classes I–III) classified a greater proportion of patients as low risk (68% [2152/3181]) than either a CURB score <1 (51% [1635/3181]) or a CURB-65 score <2 (61% [1952/3181]). Low-risk patients identified based on the Pneumonia Severity Index had a slightly lower mortality (1.4% [31/2152]) than patients classified as low-risk based on the CURB (1.7% [28/1635]) or the CURB-65 (1.7% [33/1952]). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was higher for the Pneumonia Severity Index (0.81) than for either the CURB (0.73) or CURB-65 (0.76) scores (P <0.001, for each pairwise comparison). At comparable cut-points, the Pneumonia Severity Index had a higher sensitivity and a somewhat higher negative predictive value for mortality than either CURB score.

Conclusions

The more complex Pneumonia Severity Index has a higher disciminatory power for short-term mortality, defines a greater proportion of patients at low risk, and is slightly more accurate in identifying patients at low risk than either CURB score.

El texto completo de este artículo está disponible en PDF.

Keywords : Clinical prediction rule, Community-acquired pneumonia


Esquema


 This study was supported by grant RO1 HS10049-03 from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, Maryland. Dr. Aujesky was supported in part by the Novartis Research Foundation and Dr. MJ Fine was supported in part by a K24 career development award from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.


© 2005  Elsevier Inc. Reservados todos los derechos.
Añadir a mi biblioteca Eliminar de mi biblioteca Imprimir
Exportación

    Exportación citas

  • Fichero

  • Contenido

Vol 118 - N° 4

P. 384-392 - avril 2005 Regresar al número
Artículo precedente Artículo precedente
  • Community-acquired pneumonia as the initial manifestation of serious underlying diseases
  • Miquel Falguera, Mariela Martín, Agustín Ruiz-González, Ricard Pifarré, Mercè García
| Artículo siguiente Artículo siguiente
  • Prolonging the return visit interval in primary care
  • Gordon Schectman, Gary Barnas, Prakash Laud, Laura Cantwell, Monica Horton, Edwin J. Zarling

Bienvenido a EM-consulte, la referencia de los profesionales de la salud.
El acceso al texto completo de este artículo requiere una suscripción.

¿Ya suscrito a @@106933@@ revista ?

@@150455@@ Voir plus

Mi cuenta


Declaración CNIL

EM-CONSULTE.COM se declara a la CNIL, la declaración N º 1286925.

En virtud de la Ley N º 78-17 del 6 de enero de 1978, relativa a las computadoras, archivos y libertades, usted tiene el derecho de oposición (art.26 de la ley), el acceso (art.34 a 38 Ley), y correcta (artículo 36 de la ley) los datos que le conciernen. Por lo tanto, usted puede pedir que se corrija, complementado, clarificado, actualizado o suprimido información sobre usted que son inexactos, incompletos, engañosos, obsoletos o cuya recogida o de conservación o uso está prohibido.
La información personal sobre los visitantes de nuestro sitio, incluyendo su identidad, son confidenciales.
El jefe del sitio en el honor se compromete a respetar la confidencialidad de los requisitos legales aplicables en Francia y no de revelar dicha información a terceros.


Todo el contenido en este sitio: Copyright © 2026 Elsevier, sus licenciantes y colaboradores. Se reservan todos los derechos, incluidos los de minería de texto y datos, entrenamiento de IA y tecnologías similares. Para todo el contenido de acceso abierto, se aplican los términos de licencia de Creative Commons.