4.7 Article

Stratifying Risk Factors for Multidrug-Resistant Pathogens in Hospitalized Patients Coming From the Community With Pneumonia

期刊

CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES
卷 54, 期 4, 页码 470-478

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/cid/cir840

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Not all risk factors for acquiring multidrug-resistant (MDR) organisms are equivalent in predicting pneumonia caused by resistant pathogens in the community. We evaluated risk factors for acquiring MDR bacteria in patients coming from the community who were hospitalized with pneumonia. Our evaluation was based on actual infection with a resistant pathogen and clinical outcome during hospitalization. Methods. An observational, prospective study was conducted on consecutive patients coming from the community who were hospitalized with pneumonia. Data on admission and during hospitalization were collected. Logistic regression models were used to evaluate risk factors for acquiring MDR bacteria independently associated with the actual presence of a resistant pathogen and in-hospital mortality. Results. Among the 935 patients enrolled in the study, 473 (51%) had at least 1 risk factor for acquiring MDR bacteria on admission. Of all risk factors, hospitalization in the preceding 90 days (odds ratio [OR], 4.87 95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.90-12.4]; P = .001) and residency in a nursing home (OR, 3.55 [95% CI, 1.12-11.24]; P = .031) were independent predictors for an actual infection with a resistant pathogen. A score able to predict pneumonia caused by a resistant pathogen was computed, including comorbidities and risk factors for MDR. Hospitalization in the preceding 90 days and residency in a nursing home were also independent predictors for in-hospital mortality. Conclusions. Risk factors for acquiring MDR bacteria should be weighted differently, and a probabilistic approach to identifying resistant pathogens among patients coming from the community with pneumonia should be embraced.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据