Community-acquired pneumonia: use of clinical characteristics of acutely admitted patients for the development of a diagnostic model - a cross-sectional multicentre study.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to describe the clinical characteristics of adults with suspected acute community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) on hospitalisation, evaluate their prediction performance for CAP and compare the performance of the model to the initial assessment of the physician. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, multicentre study. SETTING: The data originated from the INfectious DisEases in Emergency Departments study and were collected prospectively from patient interviews and medical records. The study included four Danish medical emergency departments (EDs) and was conducted between 1 March 2021 and 28 February 2022. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 954 patients admitted with suspected infection were included in the study. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME: The primary outcome was CAP diagnosis assessed by an expert panel. RESULTS: According to expert evaluation, CAP had a 28% prevalence. 13 diagnostic predictors were identified using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression to build the prediction model: dyspnoea, expectoration, cough, common cold, malaise, chest pain, respiratory rate (>20 breaths/min), oxygen saturation (<96%), abnormal chest auscultation, leucocytes (<3.5×109/L or >8.8×109/L) and neutrophils (>7.5×109/L). C reactive protein (<20 mg/L) and having no previous event of CAP contributed negatively to the final model. The predictors yielded good prediction performance for CAP with an area under the receiver-operator characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.85 (CI 0.77 to 0.92). However, the initial diagnosis made by the ED physician performed better, with an AUC of 0.86 (CI 84% to 89%). CONCLUSION: Typical respiratory symptoms combined with abnormal vital signs and elevated infection biomarkers were predictors for CAP on admission to an ED. The clinical value of the prediction model is questionable in our setting as it does not outperform the clinician's assessment. Further studies that add novel diagnostic tools and use imaging or serological markers are needed to improve a model that would help diagnose CAP in an ED setting more accurately. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04681963.

Handheld Ultrasound Devices Used by Newly Certified Operators for Pneumonia in the Emergency Department-A Diagnostic Accuracy Study.

The diagnostic accuracy of handheld ultrasound (HHUS) devices operated by newly certified operators for pneumonia is unknown. This multicenter diagnostic accuracy study included patients prospectively suspected of pneumonia from February 2021 to February 2022 in four emergency departments. The index test was a 14-zone focused lung ultrasound (FLUS) examination, with consolidation with air bronchograms as diagnostic criteria for pneumonia. FLUS examinations were performed by newly certified operators using HHUS. The reference standard was computed tomography (CT) and expert diagnosis using all medical records. The sensitivity and specificity of FLUS and chest X-ray (CXR) were compared using McNemar's test. Of the 324 scanned patients, 212 (65%) had pneumonia, according to the expert diagnosis. FLUS had a sensitivity of 31% (95% CI 26-36) and a specificity of 82% (95% CI 78-86) compared with the experts' diagnosis. Compared with CT, FLUS had a sensitivity of 32% (95% CI 27-37) and specificity of 81% (95% CI 77-85). CXR had a sensitivity of 66% (95% CI 61-72) and a specificity of 76% (95% CI 71-81) compared with the experts' diagnosis. Compared with CT, CXR had a sensitivity of 69% (95% CI 63-74) and a specificity of 68% (95% CI 62-72). Compared with the experts' diagnosis and CT diagnosis, FLUS performed by newly certified operators using HHUS devices had a significantly lower sensitivity for pneumonia when compared to CXR (p < 0.001). FLUS had a significantly higher specificity than CXR using CT diagnosis as a reference standard (p = 0.02). HHUS exhibited low sensitivity for pneumonia when used by newly certified operators.