Clinical Diagnosis of Legionella Pneumonia Revisited: Evaluation of the Community-Based Pneumonia Incidence Study Group Scoring System

This prospective case-control study sought to identify differences in presentation between Legionella pneumonia (LP) diagnosed by urinary antigen and bacteremic pneumococcal pneumonia (PP), with the aim of assessing the ability of physicians to recognize such differences at admission and validating...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Clinical infectious diseases Vol. 37; no. 4; pp. 483 - 489
Main Authors: Fernández-Sabé, Núria, Rosón, Beatriz, Carratalà, Jordi, Dorca, Jordi, Manresa, Frederic, Gudiol, Francesc
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: Chicago, IL The University of Chicago Press 15-08-2003
University of Chicago Press
Subjects:
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This prospective case-control study sought to identify differences in presentation between Legionella pneumonia (LP) diagnosed by urinary antigen and bacteremic pneumococcal pneumonia (PP), with the aim of assessing the ability of physicians to recognize such differences at admission and validating the Community-Based Pneumonia Incidence Study (CBPIS) Group scoring system for LP diagnosis. Significant differences in presentation were found: male sex, previous receipt of β-lactam therapy, and temperature >39°C were positively associated with LP; purulent sputum, pleuritic chest pain, and previous upper respiratory tract infection were negatively associated with LP. Physicians considered Legionella to be the most likely diagnosis in 52 (64%) of 81 LP cases and in 8 (6%) of 136 PP cases. Initial administration of a macrolide and rifampin and requests for urinary antigen testing for Legionella at admission were significantly more frequent among patients with LP. Overall, the CBPIS score did not differentiate reliably between LP and PP. Although certain presenting clinical features may allow recognition of LP, it is difficult to express them in a reliable scoring system.
Bibliography:istex:9CC99C78D0CBD2C2093AB6DA7B5F5292257B4BBF
ark:/67375/HXZ-JTBXXDF8-H
ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
ObjectType-Article-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
ISSN:1058-4838
1537-6591
DOI:10.1086/376627