Validation Study of the Drug Resistance in Pneumonia (DRIP) Score in Predicting the Risk of Drug-Resistant Pathogens Among Patients with Pneumonia: A Single Center Cross-Sectional Study

M. Villalobos, R. Zotomayor, A. Gerodias, A. Reyes
{"title":"Validation Study of the Drug Resistance in Pneumonia (DRIP) Score in Predicting the Risk of Drug-Resistant Pathogens Among Patients with Pneumonia: A Single Center Cross-Sectional Study","authors":"M. Villalobos, R. Zotomayor, A. Gerodias, A. Reyes","doi":"10.1164/ajrccm-conference.2020.201.1_meetingabstracts.a2130","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"RATIONALE Drug resistance in pneumonia (DRIP) score, among other prediction models, performed significantly better in detecting the risk of pneumonia due to drug-resistant pathogens (DRP). The use of this clinical prediction score may have the potential to decrease the use of unwarranted extended spectrum antibiotics in patients with low risk of pneumonia due to DRP. Furthermore, It can likewise select patients who will benefit from broad-spectrum antibiotics as initial therapy for patients with high risk of community acquired pneumonia due to DRP (CAPDRP). This study was initiated to validate its efficiency in the local setting. METHODS This is a single center cross-sectional study. Adult Filipino patients aged 18 years and above who were clinically diagnosed with CAP were included. DRIP score was performed within 48 hours of admission to patients admitted for CAP. A score of <4 was classified as low risk and a score of ≥ 4 was classified as high risk. Confirmation of the presence of DRP was done through review of microbiologic cultures. RESULTS A total of 195 patients were included. DRIP score identified patients at high or low risk of pneumonia due to DRP with a sensitivity of 62.1 (95% CI, 48.4 to 74.5), a specificity of 81% (95% CI, 73.4 to 87.2), a positive predictive value of 58.1% (95% CI, 44.8 to 70.5), and a negative predictive value of 83.5% (95% CI, 76, 89.4). The prevalence of pneumonia due to DRP was 29.7%. Pseudomonas aeruginosa was identified in 15 (7.14%) of patients and was the most common isolated DRP. Tube feeding (OR 5.24), prior infection with DRP (OR 4.47), and hospitalization within previous 60 days (OR 2.52) were identified to be the strongest risk factors associated with pneumonia due to DRP. A modified DRIP score (mDRIP) was derived by eliminating one of the major risk factors, which is residence in a long-term care facility. mDRIP has a sensitivity of 62.07%, specificity of 82.02%, positive likelihood ratio of 3.27 and negative likelihood ratio of 0.47. CONCLUSION This prospective study validated the performance of DRIP score in predicting pneumonia due to DRP. DRIP Score, as well as the modified DRIP score (mDRIP), are valuable prediction models that can be used in the local setting to possibly lessen unnecessary use and therefore preserve the utilization of broadspectrum antibiotics among low risk patients. Future studies are necessary to establish definitive benefit on patient outcome measures.","PeriodicalId":143194,"journal":{"name":"A59. CLINICAL DIAGNOSIS, PREDICTION AND OUTCOMES OF LUNG INFECTIONS","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"A59. CLINICAL DIAGNOSIS, PREDICTION AND OUTCOMES OF LUNG INFECTIONS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1164/ajrccm-conference.2020.201.1_meetingabstracts.a2130","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

RATIONALE Drug resistance in pneumonia (DRIP) score, among other prediction models, performed significantly better in detecting the risk of pneumonia due to drug-resistant pathogens (DRP). The use of this clinical prediction score may have the potential to decrease the use of unwarranted extended spectrum antibiotics in patients with low risk of pneumonia due to DRP. Furthermore, It can likewise select patients who will benefit from broad-spectrum antibiotics as initial therapy for patients with high risk of community acquired pneumonia due to DRP (CAPDRP). This study was initiated to validate its efficiency in the local setting. METHODS This is a single center cross-sectional study. Adult Filipino patients aged 18 years and above who were clinically diagnosed with CAP were included. DRIP score was performed within 48 hours of admission to patients admitted for CAP. A score of <4 was classified as low risk and a score of ≥ 4 was classified as high risk. Confirmation of the presence of DRP was done through review of microbiologic cultures. RESULTS A total of 195 patients were included. DRIP score identified patients at high or low risk of pneumonia due to DRP with a sensitivity of 62.1 (95% CI, 48.4 to 74.5), a specificity of 81% (95% CI, 73.4 to 87.2), a positive predictive value of 58.1% (95% CI, 44.8 to 70.5), and a negative predictive value of 83.5% (95% CI, 76, 89.4). The prevalence of pneumonia due to DRP was 29.7%. Pseudomonas aeruginosa was identified in 15 (7.14%) of patients and was the most common isolated DRP. Tube feeding (OR 5.24), prior infection with DRP (OR 4.47), and hospitalization within previous 60 days (OR 2.52) were identified to be the strongest risk factors associated with pneumonia due to DRP. A modified DRIP score (mDRIP) was derived by eliminating one of the major risk factors, which is residence in a long-term care facility. mDRIP has a sensitivity of 62.07%, specificity of 82.02%, positive likelihood ratio of 3.27 and negative likelihood ratio of 0.47. CONCLUSION This prospective study validated the performance of DRIP score in predicting pneumonia due to DRP. DRIP Score, as well as the modified DRIP score (mDRIP), are valuable prediction models that can be used in the local setting to possibly lessen unnecessary use and therefore preserve the utilization of broadspectrum antibiotics among low risk patients. Future studies are necessary to establish definitive benefit on patient outcome measures.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
肺炎耐药(DRIP)评分预测肺炎患者耐药病原体风险的验证研究:单中心横断面研究
在其他预测模型中,肺炎耐药(DRIP)评分在检测耐药病原体(DRP)引起的肺炎风险方面表现明显更好。该临床预测评分的使用可能有可能减少DRP低风险肺炎患者使用无根据的广谱抗生素。此外,它同样可以选择将受益于广谱抗生素的患者作为DRP (CAPDRP)引起的社区获得性肺炎高风险患者的初始治疗。本研究旨在验证其在当地环境中的有效性。方法:本研究为单中心横断面研究。年龄在18岁及以上且临床诊断为CAP的菲律宾成年患者被纳入研究。对因CAP入院的患者在入院48小时内进行DRIP评分。评分<4分为低风险,评分≥4分为高风险。通过微生物培养检查确认DRP的存在。结果共纳入195例患者。DRIP评分识别DRP所致肺炎的高或低风险患者,敏感性为62.1 (95% CI, 48.4 ~ 74.5),特异性为81% (95% CI, 73.4 ~ 87.2),阳性预测值为58.1% (95% CI, 44.8 ~ 70.5),阴性预测值为83.5% (95% CI, 76 ~ 89.4)。DRP所致肺炎患病率为29.7%。15例(7.14%)患者检出铜绿假单胞菌,是最常见的分离DRP。管饲(OR 5.24)、既往感染DRP (OR 4.47)和过去60天内住院(OR 2.52)被确定为与DRP所致肺炎相关的最强危险因素。修改后的DRIP评分(mDRIP)是通过消除一个主要的危险因素,即居住在长期护理机构得出的。mDRIP的敏感性为62.07%,特异性为82.02%,阳性似然比为3.27,阴性似然比为0.47。结论本前瞻性研究验证了DRIP评分在预测DRP所致肺炎中的作用。DRIP评分以及改进后的DRIP评分(mDRIP)是有价值的预测模型,可用于当地环境,可能减少不必要的使用,从而保持低风险患者对广谱抗生素的使用。未来的研究是必要的,以确定明确的效益对患者的结果措施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Acute and Sustained IL-17a Response in Bronchiectasis Exacerbations as Marker of Chronic Inflammation Validation Study of the Drug Resistance in Pneumonia (DRIP) Score in Predicting the Risk of Drug-Resistant Pathogens Among Patients with Pneumonia: A Single Center Cross-Sectional Study Pneumonia in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis: Impact of Microbial Airway Colonisation Risk Factors for Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia Caused by MRSA in a Respiratory Intensive Care Unit Unresolved Atelectasis in Refractory Mycoplasma Pneumoniae Pneumonia: Predictive Factors and the Influence of Corticosteroids and Bronchoscopy Lavage Therapy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1