Department of Emergency Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, College of Medicine, Taipei 100, Taiwan.
Am J Emerg Med. 2012 Nov;30(9):1796-803. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2012.02.016. Epub 2012 May 23.
The aim of this study was to assess the performance of 3 different influenza-like illness (ILI) case definitions, adopted by the European (European-CDC), USA (USA-CDC), and Taiwan Centers for Disease Prevention and Control (Taiwan-CDC), as screening tools for influenza during the 2009 H1N1 pandemic.
From August 15 to 30, 2009, all emergency department patients with clinical symptoms or at epidemiologic risk for influenza were enrolled in an observational cohort study. Influenza diagnosis was established by positive rapid influenza diagnostic test or virus isolation. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of the European-, USA, and Taiwan-CDC ILI case definitions for screening were determined.
A total of 870 patients were screened during the study period. Rapid influenza diagnostic test was positive in 315 patients, 273 (85.6%) of whom had fever duration less than 72 hours. Virus isolation identified 4 more patients with influenza A initially negative by rapid influenza diagnostic test. The mean (SD) age of these 319 patients was 24.3 (18.1) years. Of the 870 screened patients, 670 (77.0%), 476 (54.7%), and 325 (37.4%) met the European-, USA-, and Taiwan-CDC ILI case definition, respectively. Screening sensitivity was 95%, 77.7%, and 57.7% and specificity was 33.4%, 58.6%, and 74.4%, respectively. Differences in sensitivity and specificity between any 2 of the 3 groups were statistically significant (P < .05).
First-line physicians should recognize the advantage and limitation of different ILI case definitions in influenza screening, especially confronted by pandemic or highly pathogenic avian influenza in the future.
本研究旨在评估欧洲(欧洲疾控中心)、美国(美国疾控中心)和台湾疾病预防控制中心(台湾疾控中心)采用的 3 种不同的流感样疾病(ILI)病例定义作为 2009 年 H1N1 大流行期间流感筛查工具的性能。
2009 年 8 月 15 日至 30 日,对所有有临床症状或有流感流行病学风险的急诊科患者进行了一项观察性队列研究。流感诊断通过快速流感诊断检测或病毒分离阳性确定。确定了欧洲、美国和台湾疾控中心 ILI 病例定义用于筛查的敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值和阴性预测值。
在研究期间共筛查了 870 例患者。315 例患者快速流感诊断检测阳性,其中 273 例(85.6%)发热时间少于 72 小时。病毒分离在最初快速流感诊断检测呈阴性的 4 例患者中鉴定出流感 A 。319 例患者的平均(SD)年龄为 24.3(18.1)岁。在筛查的 870 例患者中,分别有 670 例(77.0%)、476 例(54.7%)和 325 例(37.4%)符合欧洲、美国和台湾疾控中心的 ILI 病例定义。筛查敏感性分别为 95%、77.7%和 57.7%,特异性分别为 33.4%、58.6%和 74.4%。3 组中任意 2 组之间的敏感性和特异性差异均具有统计学意义(P <.05)。
一线医生应认识到不同的 ILI 病例定义在流感筛查中的优势和局限性,特别是在未来面临大流行或高致病性禽流感时。