RESUMEN
Accurate prognostic tools for mortality in patients with healthcare-associated pneumonia (HCAP) are needed to provide appropriate medical care, but the efficacy for mortality prediction of tools like PSI, A-DROP, I-ROAD, and CURB-65, widely used for predicting mortality in community-acquired and hospital-acquired pneumonia cases, remains controversial. In this study, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis using PubMed, Cochrane Library (trials), and Ichushi web database (accessed on August 22, 2022). We identified articles evaluating either PSI, A-DROP, I-ROAD, or CURB-65 and the mortality outcome in patients with HCAP, and calculated the pooled sensitivities, specificities, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and the summary area under the curves (AUCs) for mortality prediction. Additionally, the differences in predicting prognosis among these four assessment tools were evaluated using overall AUCs pooled from AUC values reported in included studies. Eventually, 21 articles were included and these quality assessments were evaluated by QUADAS-2. Using a cut-off value of moderate in patients with HCAP, the range of pooled sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, and DOR were found to be 0.91-0.97, 0.15-0.44, 1.14-1.66, 0.18-0.33, and 3.86-9.32, respectively. Upon using a cut-off value of severe in those patients, the range of pooled sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, and DOR were 0.63-0.70, 0.54-0.66, 1.50-2.03, 0.47-0.58, and 2.66-4.32, respectively. Overall AUCs were 0.70 (0.68-0.72), 0.70 (0.63-0.76), 0.68 (0.64-0.73), and 0.67 (0.63-0.71), respectively, for PSI, A-DROP, I-ROAD, and CURB-65 (p = 0.66). In conclusion, these severity assessment tools do not have enough ability to predict mortality in HCAP patients. Furthermore, there are no significant differences in predictive performance among these four severity assessment tools.