Publish in this journal
Journal Information
Vol. 53. Issue 8.
Pages 469-470 (August 2017)
Share
Share
Download PDF
More article options
Vol. 53. Issue 8.
Pages 469-470 (August 2017)
Letter to the Editor
DOI: 10.1016/j.arbr.2017.01.026
Full text access
New Year, New Challenges for Community Acquired Pneumonia
Nuevo año, nuevos desafíos respecto a la neumonía adquirida en la comunidad
Visits
675
Pablo Millares Martin
Whitehall Surgery Leeds, UK
This item has received
675
Visits
Article information
Full Text
Bibliography
Download PDF
Statistics
Full Text
Dear Editor:

The editorial about recent changes in pneumonia1 addresses treatment as regards early antibiotics and dilemmas regarding steroids. However, there is one early step that needs further attention, and this has not even received a brief mention.

Deciding whether a patient is at high risk and in need of early hospitalization needs further consideration. Several different scales are used to assess risk, such as the PSI, SMARTCOP, CURB-65 and SOAR, but the use of these tools in primary care is considerably hampered by limited access to some parameters (for example urea/blood urea nitrogen, or partial arterial oxygen pressure to FIO2 ratio).

In the case of the PSI, which gives better results in low risk patients,2 step 1 is easy enough to apply, but all patients over age of 50 will need further assessment, and this step alone is not enough. Step 2 can still produce scores up to 185 points (class V needs a score over 130, indicating highest risk), even without including the 110 points from laboratory or radiographic findings.

Community acquired pneumonia is still evaluated differently in primary and secondary care. Therefore, we need to work together to create a tool that can be used in the early stages of the disease, based on more than the patient's history, a clinical examination and bedside tests. This would prevent unnecessary admissions and also provide more input in patients at high risk, thus improving outcomes in these populations.

Clearly, existing guidelines must be updated,1 and better assessment algorithms and tools are needed. There is little point in suggesting, for example, that C-reactive protein (CRP) be measured before considering antibiotics,3 if this test, in the UK, is only available in hospitals, and the time spent awaiting results can delay a critical decision. Risk assessment in patients with community acquired pneumonia is already a challenge in general practice.

References
[1]
I. Alfageme Michavila.
¿Qué ha cambiado en la neumonía adquirida en la comunidad en los últimos años?.
Arch Bronconeumol, 53 (2017), pp. 3-4
[2]
D. Aujesky, T.E. Auble, D.M. Yealy, R.A. Stone, D.S. Obrosky, T.P. Meehan, et al.
Prospective comparison of three validated prediction rules for prognosis in community-acquired pneumonia.
Am J Med, 118 (2005), pp. 384-389
[3]
NICE.
Pneumonia in adults: diagnosis and management (CG191).
(2016),
Retrieved from https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg191/resources/pneumonia-in-adults-diagnosis-and-management-35109868127173 (30.12.16)
Copyright © 2017. SEPAR
Idiomas
Archivos de Bronconeumología (English Edition)

Subscribe to our newsletter

Article options
Tools
es en

¿Es usted profesional sanitario apto para prescribir o dispensar medicamentos?

Are you a health professional able to prescribe or dispense drugs?

es en
Política de cookies Cookies policy
Utilizamos cookies propias y de terceros para mejorar nuestros servicios y mostrarle publicidad relacionada con sus preferencias mediante el análisis de sus hábitos de navegación. Si continua navegando, consideramos que acepta su uso. Puede cambiar la configuración u obtener más información aquí. To improve our services and products, we use "cookies" (own or third parties authorized) to show advertising related to client preferences through the analyses of navigation customer behavior. Continuing navigation will be considered as acceptance of this use. You can change the settings or obtain more information by clicking here.