Suppr超能文献

一种临床诊断方法与疾病控制和预防中心用于识别机械通气相关性肺炎的监测技术之间的比较。

Comparison between a clinical diagnosis method and the surveillance technique of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention for identification of mechanical ventilator-associated pneumonia.

作者信息

Waltrick Renata, Possamai Dimitri Sauter, de Aguiar Fernanda Perito, Dadam Micheli, de Souza Filho Valmir João, Ramos Lucas Rocker, Laurett Renata da Silva, Fujiwara Kênia, Caldeira Filho Milton, Koenig Álvaro, Westphal Glauco Adrieno

机构信息

Programa de Residência em Medicina Intensiva, Hospital Municipal São José, Joinville, SC, BR.

Serviço de Fisioterapia, Hospital Municipal São José, Joinville, SC, BR.

出版信息

Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2015 Jul-Sep;27(3):260-5. doi: 10.5935/0103-507X.20150047.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the agreement between a new epidemiological surveillance method of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention and the clinical pulmonary infection score for mechanical ventilator-associated pneumonia detection.

METHODS

This was a prospective cohort study that evaluated patients in the intensive care units of two hospitals who were intubated for more than 48 hours between August 2013 and June 2014. Patients were evaluated daily by physical therapist using the clinical pulmonary infection score. A nurse independently applied the new surveillance method proposed by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention. The diagnostic agreement between the methods was evaluated. A clinical pulmonary infection score of ≥ 7 indicated a clinical diagnosis of mechanical ventilator-associated pneumonia, and the association of a clinical pulmonary infection score ≥ 7 with an isolated semiquantitative culture consisting of ≥ 104 colony-forming units indicated a definitive diagnosis.

RESULTS

Of the 801 patients admitted to the intensive care units, 198 required mechanical ventilation. Of these, 168 were intubated for more than 48 hours. A total of 18 (10.7%) cases of mechanical ventilation-associated infectious conditions were identified, 14 (8.3%) of which exhibited possible or probable mechanical ventilator-associated pneumonia, which represented 35% (14/38) of mechanical ventilator-associated pneumonia cases. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention method identified cases of mechanical ventilator-associated pneumonia with a sensitivity of 0.37, specificity of 1.0, positive predictive value of 1.0, and negative predictive value of 0.84. The differences resulted in discrepancies in the mechanical ventilator-associated pneumonia incidence density (CDC, 5.2/1000 days of mechanical ventilation; clinical pulmonary infection score ≥ 7, 13.1/1000 days of mechanical ventilation).

CONCLUSION

The Center for Disease Control and Prevention method failed to detect mechanical ventilator-associated pneumonia cases and may not be satisfactory as a surveillance method.

摘要

目的

评估疾病控制与预防中心的一种新的流行病学监测方法与临床肺部感染评分在机械通气相关性肺炎检测方面的一致性。

方法

这是一项前瞻性队列研究,评估了2013年8月至2014年6月期间在两家医院重症监护病房接受插管超过48小时的患者。物理治疗师每天使用临床肺部感染评分对患者进行评估。一名护士独立应用疾病控制与预防中心提出的新监测方法。评估两种方法之间的诊断一致性。临床肺部感染评分≥7表明临床诊断为机械通气相关性肺炎,临床肺部感染评分≥7与分离出的半定量培养物中≥104个菌落形成单位相关则表明确诊。

结果

在入住重症监护病房的801例患者中,198例需要机械通气。其中,168例插管超过48小时。共识别出18例(10.7%)机械通气相关感染情况,其中14例(8.3%)表现为可能或很可能的机械通气相关性肺炎,占机械通气相关性肺炎病例的35%(14/38)。疾病控制与预防中心的方法识别机械通气相关性肺炎病例的敏感性为0.37,特异性为1.0,阳性预测值为1.0,阴性预测值为0.84。这些差异导致机械通气相关性肺炎发病密度存在差异(疾病控制与预防中心方法为5.2/1000机械通气日;临床肺部感染评分≥7为13.1/1000机械通气日)。

结论

疾病控制与预防中心的方法未能检测出机械通气相关性肺炎病例,作为一种监测方法可能并不令人满意。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1560/4592121/22a5c57d6cef/rbti-27-03-0260-g01.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验