Usefulness of a predictive model to hospitalize patients with low-risk community-acquired pneumonia.

INTRODUCTION: A high proportion of patients with low-risk community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) (classes I-III of the Pneumonia Severity Index) are hospitalized. The purpose of this study was to determine whether validated severity scales are used in clinical practice to make admission decisions, identify the variables that influence this decision, and evaluate the potential predictive value of these variables. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective, observational study of patients ≥ 18 years of age with a diagnosis of low-risk CAP hospitalized or referred from the Emergency Department to outpatient consultations. A multivariate logistic regression predictive model was built to predict the decision to hospitalize a patient. RESULTS: The study population was composed of 1,208 patients (806 inpatients and 402 outpatients). The severity of CAP was estimated in 250 patients (20.7%). The factors that determined hospitalization were "abnormal findings in complementary studies" (643/806: 79.8%; due to respiratory failure in 443 patients) and "signs of clinical deterioration" [64/806 (7.9%): hypotension (16/64, 25%); hemoptoic expectoration (12/64, 18.8%); tachypnea (10/64, 15.6%)]. In total, ambulatory management was not contraindicated in 24.7% of hospitalized patients (199). The predictive model built to decide about hospitalization had a good power of discrimination (AUC 0.876; 95%CI: 0.855-0.897). CONCLUSIONS: Scales are rarely used to estimate the severity of CAP at the emergency department. The decision to hospitalize or not a patient largely depends on the clinical experience of the physician. Our predictive model showed a good power to discriminate the patients who required hospitalization. Further studies are warranted to validate these results.

Cardiac function after CPAP therapy in patients with chronic heart failure and sleep apnea: a multicenter study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is an effective treatment for sleep apnea (SA), although the evidence for improving chronic heart failure (CHF) is inconclusive. Our aim was to evaluate the effect of CPAP treatment on the left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF) among other cardiological variables in a randomized, multicenter, placebo (sham-CPAP)-controlled study. METHODS: After the selection procedure, 60 patients with CHF with LVEF<45% and SA with an apnea-hypopnea index (AHI)>10/h were evaluated at baseline, and after 3 months of treatment with optimal CPAP or sham-CPAP. The assessment was based on the LVEF, hypertension, daytime sleepiness (Epworth sleepiness scale [ESS]), quality of life (SF-36), New York Heart Scale (NYHA score), dyspnea (by using the Borg scale) and exercise tolerance (6-min walk test). RESULTS: The mean AHI was normalized in the optimal CPAP group but not in the sham-CPAP group. The LVEF showed a significant improvement in the group of patients treated with CPAP (2.5; 95% CI: 0.6 to 4.3), which was not observed in the sham-CPAP group (0.0; 95% CI: -2.1 to 2.1). However, the change in the LVEF from baseline to 3 months was not significantly greater in the whole group (obstructive and Cheyne-Stokes events) treated with CPAP than in the control group (p: 0.07). In patients with only obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), who account for 83% of the total population, there was a significant improvement in the LVEF in the group of patients treated with CPAP but no such improvement in the sham-CPAP group. In this OSA group, the change in the LVEF from baseline to 3 months was significantly greater in the group treated with CPAP than in the sham-CPAP group (p: 0.03). The other variables studied were not modified. When the patients were divided according to the severity of the LVEF (a LVEF cut-off of 30%), improvement was observed in those with a LVEF>30. No changes were found in the other cardiological variables. CONCLUSIONS: CPAP therapy proved to be useful in patients with associated sleep-disordered breathing and CHF. The improvement was more marked in patients with a LVEF>30%. However, the increased LVEF in the CPAP group was not accompanied by changes in the other cardiological variables.