Boccazzi A, Garotta M, Pontari S, Agostoni C V
Fondazione Policlinico Ca Granda IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Infez Med. 2011 Jun;19(2):100-5.
This study aimed to evaluate the role of clinical diagnosis vs. rapid antigen detection tests (RADT) in identifying streptococcal vs. non-streptococcal cases of acute pharyngitis (AP) with respect to a scoring schedule. The Breese scoring system, modified by eliminating the count of peripheral WBC, was used in the study. At enrolment, cases of AP observed by office-based pediatricians were judged on a clinical basis as possibly of streptococcal or of non-streptococcal origin and a clinical score recorded. At the end of the visit and following completion of the clinical score to document the presence/absence of a group A beta haemolytic streptococcus (GABHS), a confirmatory RADT was performed. In RADT negative cases a standard throat swab and culture were performed. In all, 629 children presenting with AP were enrolled in the study. A correct clinical diagnosis was predicted on the basis of the clinical observation in 74.2% of cases (with a sensitivity of 81.1% and specificity of 70.5%). In cases judged as "streptococcal", a mean score of 27.6 was recorded both in those patients with a positive or negative RADT/throat swab for GABHS. By contrast, among cases considered of non-streptococcal aetiology, negative RADT/culture had a mean score of 24.3 compared to a mean score of 25 in those with a positive RADT/culture. Intragroup score differences were not significant, while intergroup differences were highly significant. Optimization of AP treatment requires careful identification of streptococcal cases, avoiding unnecessary antibiotic treatment which would contribute to enhancing antibiotic resistance and increase medical treatment costs. We document that clinical observation alone, although performed by skilled pediatricians, will misdiagnose a sizeable percentage of cases. As indicated by this study, scores may suffer from a subjective interpretative bias in grading the severity of signs and symptoms.
本研究旨在根据一个评分表,评估临床诊断与快速抗原检测试验(RADT)在鉴别急性咽炎(AP)的链球菌性与非链球菌性病例中的作用。本研究采用了经修改的Breese评分系统,即去除外周白细胞计数。在入组时,由门诊儿科医生观察到的AP病例在临床基础上被判断为可能是链球菌性或非链球菌性起源,并记录临床评分。在就诊结束时,完成临床评分以记录A组β溶血性链球菌(GABHS)的有无后,进行确诊性RADT检测。在RADT阴性的病例中,进行标准咽拭子培养。共有629例患AP的儿童入组本研究。基于临床观察,在74.2%的病例中预测了正确的临床诊断(敏感性为81.1%,特异性为70.5%)。在被判断为“链球菌性”的病例中,GABHS的RADT/咽拭子检测呈阳性或阴性的患者平均得分均为27.6。相比之下,在被认为是非链球菌病因的病例中,RADT/培养阴性的患者平均得分为24.3,而RADT/培养阳性的患者平均得分为25。组内评分差异不显著,而组间差异非常显著。优化AP治疗需要仔细鉴别链球菌性病例,避免不必要的抗生素治疗,因为这会导致抗生素耐药性增加并提高医疗成本。我们证明,仅靠临床观察,尽管由经验丰富的儿科医生进行,仍会误诊相当比例的病例。如本研究所示,在对体征和症状的严重程度进行分级时,评分可能存在主观解释偏差。