Lower mortality rate in elderly patients with community-onset pneumonia on treatment with aspirin

BACKGROUND: Pneumonia is complicated by high rate of mortality and cardiovascular events (CVEs). The potential benefit of aspirin, which lowers platelet aggregation by inhibition of thromboxane A2 production, is still unclear. The aim of the study was to assess the impact of aspirin on mortality in patients with pneumonia. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive patients admitted to the University-Hospital Policlinico Umberto I (Rome, Italy) with community-onset pneumonia were recruited and prospectively followed up until discharge or death. The primary end point was the occurrence of death up to 30 days after admission; the secondary end point was the intrahospital incidence of nonfatal myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke. One thousand and five patients (age, 74.7±15.1 years) were included in the study: 390 were receiving aspirin (100 mg/day) at the time of hospitalization, whereas 615 patients were aspirin free. During the follow-up, 16.2% of patients died; among these, 19 (4.9%) were aspirin users and 144 (23.4%; P<0.001) were aspirin nonusers. Overall, nonfatal CVEs occurred in 7% of patients, 8.3% in nonaspirin users, and 4.9% in aspirin users (odds ratio, 1.77; 95% confidence interval, 1.03 to 3.04; P=0.040). The Cox regression analysis showed that pneumonia severity index (PSI), severe sepsis, pleural effusion, and PaO(2)/FiO(2) ratio <300 negatively influenced survival, whereas aspirin therapy was associated with improved survival. Compared to patients receiving aspirin, the propensity score adjusted analysis confirmed that patients not taking aspirin had a hazard ratio of 2.07 (1.08 to 3.98; P=0.029) for total mortality. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that chronic aspirin use is associated with lower mortality rate within 30 days after hospital admission in a large cohort of patients with pneumonia

Escala CARE de empatia: tradução para o Português falado no Brasil e resultados iniciais de validação

Objectives: To translate and to adapt the scale Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) for using in Brazil. To obtain preliminary results about concurrent validation of this scale. Methods: The scale was translated and adapted from English by appropriated recommended methodology. Twenty patients from the pulmonology clinic of a public hospital, associated with the Brazilian public health system, were interviewed about the degree of understanding of the scale final version. The second step of the study enrolled twelve patients from the same clinic who answered the Brazilian version of CARE and the Perception Scale of Empathy By Patients (EPEP), shortly after the end of a routine consultation The physicians responsible for the care of these patients were also approached and asked to answer a questionnaire containing the Brazilian version of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) and the Inventory of Empathy (IE). Results: Nineteen of 20 patients reported a high degree of understanding about the items of the Brazilian version of CARE. The median CARE score for other 12 volunteers was 44.5 (20-63). The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the answers of these patients was 0.867. CARE scores significantly correlated with EPEP scores (r = 0.699, p = 0.01) and with subsection altruism of the IE (r = 0.744, p = 0.01). CARE scale showed no significant correlations with global scores of IE and IRI reported by physicians. Conclusion: The Brazilian version of CARE is easy to understand and displays acceptable evidences of concurrent validity and internal consistency. Measures of empathy reported by doctors tend to not correlate with perceptions of patients.Objetivos: Traduzir e adaptar para uso no Brasil a escala de avaliação de empatia clínica Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE). Fornecer resultados preliminares de validação concorrente dessa escala. Métodos: A escala em inglês foi traduzida e adaptada seguindo metodologia recomendada. Vinte pacientes atendidos em ambulatório de pneumologia em hospital público ligado ao Sistema Único de Saúde foram entrevistados quanto ao grau de compreensão da versão final do instrumento. Em uma segunda fase, doze pacientes do mesmo ambulatório responderam a versão brasileira da escala CARE e a Escala de Percepção de Empatia Pelo Paciente (EPEP), logo após término de consulta de rotina. Os médicos responsáveis pelo atendimento desses pacientes também foram convidados, após a consulta, a responder questionário contendo a versão brasileira do Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) e o Inventário de Empatia (IE). Resultados: Dezenove dos 20 pacientes referiram grau elevado de compreensão dos itens da versão brasileira da escala CARE. O escore mediano da escala CARE para outros 12 voluntários foi 44,5 (20-63). O coeficiente alfa de Cronbach para as respostas dos últimos foi 0,867. Os escores CARE correlacionaram-se de maneira significante com os escores EPEP (r=0,699; p=0,01) e com o subitem altruísmo do IE (r=0,744, p=0,01). A escala CARE não mostrou correlações significantes com os escores globais das medidas de empatia IRI e IE informados pelos médicos. Conclusão: A versão brasileira da escala CARE é de fácil compreensão e exibe evidências aceitáveis de validade concorrente e consistência interna. Medidas de empatia referidas pelos médicos tendem a não se correlacionar com as percepções dos pacientes

Lower mortality rate in elderly patients with community-onset pneumonia on treatment with aspirin

BACKGROUND: Pneumonia is complicated by high rate of mortality and cardiovascular events (CVEs). The potential benefit of aspirin, which lowers platelet aggregation by inhibition of thromboxane A2 production, is still unclear. The aim of the study was to assess the impact of aspirin on mortality in patients with pneumonia. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive patients admitted to the University-Hospital Policlinico Umberto I (Rome, Italy) with community-onset pneumonia were recruited and prospectively followed up until discharge or death. The primary end point was the occurrence of death up to 30 days after admission; the secondary end point was the intrahospital incidence of nonfatal myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke. One thousand and five patients (age, 74.7±15.1 years) were included in the study: 390 were receiving aspirin (100 mg/day) at the time of hospitalization, whereas 615 patients were aspirin free. During the follow-up, 16.2% of patients died; among these, 19 (4.9%) were aspirin users and 144 (23.4%; P<0.001) were aspirin nonusers. Overall, nonfatal CVEs occurred in 7% of patients, 8.3% in nonaspirin users, and 4.9% in aspirin users (odds ratio, 1.77; 95% confidence interval, 1.03 to 3.04; P=0.040). The Cox regression analysis showed that pneumonia severity index (PSI), severe sepsis, pleural effusion, and PaO(2)/FiO(2) ratio <300 negatively influenced survival, whereas aspirin therapy was associated with improved survival. Compared to patients receiving aspirin, the propensity score adjusted analysis confirmed that patients not taking aspirin had a hazard ratio of 2.07 (1.08 to 3.98; P=0.029) for total mortality. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that chronic aspirin use is associated with lower mortality rate within 30 days after hospital admission in a large cohort of patients with pneumonia

Individualizing risk of multidrug-resistant pathogens in community-onset pneumonia

The diffusion of multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacteria has created the need to identify risk factors for acquiring resistant pathogens in patients living in the community. Objective To analyze clinical features of patients with community-onset pneumonia due to MDR pathogens, to evaluate performance of existing scoring tools and to develop a bedside risk score for an early identification of these patients in the Emergency Department. Patients and Methods This was an open, observational, prospective study of consecutive patients with pneumonia, coming from the community, from January 2011 to January 2013. The new score was validated on an external cohort of 929 patients with pneumonia admitted in internal medicine departments participating at a multicenter prospective study in Spain. Results A total of 900 patients were included in the study. The final logistic regression model consisted of four variables: 1) one risk factor for HCAP, 2) bilateral pulmonary infiltration, 3) the presence of pleural effusion, and 4) the severity of respiratory impairment calculated by use of PaO2/FiO2 ratio. A new risk score, the ARUC score, was developed; compared to Aliberti, Shorr, and Shindo scores, this point score system has a good discrimination performance (AUC 0.76, 95% CI 0.71-0.82) and calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow, χ2 = 7.64; p = 0.469). The new score outperformed HCAP definition in predicting etiology due to MDR organism. The performance of this bedside score was confirmed in the validation cohort (AUC 0.68, 95% CI 0.60-0.77). Conclusion Physicians working in ED should adopt simple risk scores, like ARUC score, to select the most appropriate antibiotic regimens. This individualized approach may help clinicians to identify those patients who need an empirical broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy

Individualizing Risk of Multidrug-Resistant Pathogens in Community-Onset Pneumonia

<div><p>Introduction</p><p>The diffusion of multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacteria has created the need to identify risk factors for acquiring resistant pathogens in patients living in the community.</p><p>Objective</p><p>To analyze clinical features of patients with community-onset pneumonia due to MDR pathogens, to evaluate performance of existing scoring tools and to develop a bedside risk score for an early identification of these patients in the Emergency Department.</p><p>Patients and Methods</p><p>This was an open, observational, prospective study of consecutive patients with pneumonia, coming from the community, from January 2011 to January 2013. The new score was validated on an external cohort of 929 patients with pneumonia admitted in internal medicine departments participating at a multicenter prospective study in Spain.</p><p>Results</p><p>A total of 900 patients were included in the study. The final logistic regression model consisted of four variables: 1) one risk factor for HCAP, 2) bilateral pulmonary infiltration, 3) the presence of pleural effusion, and 4) the severity of respiratory impairment calculated by use of PaO2/FiO2 ratio. A new risk score, the ARUC score, was developed; compared to Aliberti, Shorr, and Shindo scores, this point score system has a good discrimination performance (AUC 0.76, 95% CI 0.71-0.82) and calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow, χ2 = 7.64; p = 0.469). The new score outperformed HCAP definition in predicting etiology due to MDR organism. The performance of this bedside score was confirmed in the validation cohort (AUC 0.68, 95% CI 0.60-0.77).</p><p>Conclusion</p><p>Physicians working in ED should adopt simple risk scores, like ARUC score, to select the most appropriate antibiotic regimens. This individualized approach may help clinicians to identify those patients who need an empirical broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy.</p></div

Multivariate analysis of factors associated with MDR isolation.

<p>Legend. MDR: multidrug-resistant; HCAP: health-care associated pneumonia.</p><p>Multivariate analysis of factors associated with MDR isolation.</p

ROC curves of ARUC score on the Spanish population.

<p>ROC curves of ARUC score on the Spanish population.</p

Distribution of MDR pathogens in CAP and HCAP populations.

<p>Legend. MDR: multidrug-resistant; CAP: community-acquired pneumonia; HCAP: health-care associated pneumonia.</p

Risk stratification of MDR isolation on the basis of ARUC score.

<p>Legend. MDR: multidrug-resistant.</p

Study flow diagram.

<p>Legend. ED: emergency department; HAP: hospital-acquired pneumonia.</p