Original ArticleClinical items not helpful in differentiating viral from bacterial lower respiratory tract infections in general practice
Introduction
Bacterial resistance rates are rising with increasing antibiotic consumption [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]. The magnitude of the problem varies widely between countries [1]. Defensive prescription behavior, busy consultation hours, repeated incentives by the pharmaceutical industry, and reports of increasing occurrences of newly emerging pathogens are a constant threat to a rational or evidence-based approach (e.g., antibiotic prescribing in indicated cases only) by the physician toward a patient with a respiratory tract infection [4], [9], [10], [11], [12]. Furthermore, the physician's diagnostic uncertainty increases the likelihood of unnecessary antibiotic prescribing [13]. This is especially true in lower respiratory tract infections (LRTI), with a diagnosis in general practice of 30–55 new episodes per thousand patients per year [14], [15], [16], [17]; the infrequently occurring pneumonias (20% of all LRTI) are clinically misclassified in most cases [18], [19], [20]. Acute bronchitis almost exclusively accounts for the remainder (80%) of the LRTI cases. Antibiotics are prescribed in 80% of the cases [21], [22], [23] despite the fact that acute bronchitis is mostly self-limiting [24], [25] and often viral. In pneumonia it is considered to be malpractice to withhold antibiotic treatment from a patient.
General practitioners (GPs) can theoretically postpone the decision whether or not to prescribe antibiotics by taking sputum samples for microbiologic culture. However, the time delay before receiving the test result and (false-) negative test results in more than half of the samples [26], [27], [28] restrain the GP from more frequently submitting samples to the laboratories [29]. From a clinical point of view, GPs would be better off by having a viral instead of a bacteriologic diagnosis confirmed. This would enable them to select at least those patients who do not need antibiotics. However, waiting for seroconversion (approximately 4 weeks) before knowing whether or not the patient suffered from a viral infection is no option. As a result, the GP usually decides empirically, after history-taking and physical examination, whether or not to prescribe antibiotics to the patient. Correctly predicting specific pathogens on clinical grounds in pneumonia patients seems to be difficult in most cases [30], [31]. Moreover, the GPs' clinical assessment that an infection warranting antibiotics was present and bacterial infection being found were not related in a community-based study in the United Kingdom [32]. Diagnostic studies on clinical prediction of viral or bacterial LRTI in daily general practice could not be found. High C-reactive protein (CRP) values might be predictive for bacterial infections, although evidence is poor and conflicting [33], [34], [35], [36], [37], [38]. In summary, the diagnostic value of the clinical tools GPs have at their disposal to manage LRTI is largely unknown. The present study evaluated the predictive value of symptoms, signs, leukocyte count, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and CRP for viral and bacterial LRTI, including pneumonia, in adult patients presenting with LRTI to a GP.
Section snippets
Patients and procedures
Adult patients presenting with the following symptoms and signs of LRTI to 25 GPs from 15 practices in the south of The Netherlands were eligible for the study: a new or increasing cough combined with at least one of the four respiratory criteria: dyspnoea, wheezing, chest pain, auscultation abnormalities; and at least one of the four general criteria: fever (≥38°C), perspiring, headache, myalgia. The GP had to be convinced of the diagnosis LRTI. Exclusion criteria were pregnancy and lactation,
Patients and etiologic diagnosis
Between January 1998 and April 1999, 247 LRTI patients 18–89 years of age (mean age 52) were included. One or more test results of 13 patients were missing: 11 blood samples for serologic analysis (first or second sample) and two sputum samples. An etiologic (microbiologic) diagnosis was obtained in 112 of the 234 remaining patients (48%) (Table 1). Viral LRTI (n = 49, 21%) was found as often as bacterial LRTI (n = 48, 21%). H. (para-) influenzae was the most common bacterial microorganism found
Discussion
The present diagnostic study on LRTI provides evidence of an assumption that is often prematurely derived from hospital studies and guidelines on pneumonia [12], [30], [33], [45], [46]: Extensive history-taking and physical examination do not provide clinical items that are useful to predict viral or bacterial etiology of LRTI in adult patients. Only in the theoretical situation of maximal contrast of the dependent variable in logistic regression analysis, proven viral versus proven bacterial
Acknowledgments
We thank the patients, general practitioners, and physicians' assistants who participated in this study. We thank Melanie Schnijderberg, Ruud Deurenberg, and Nancy London for their assistance with the logistics of the study.
References (57)
- et al.
Ambulatory patients with community-acquired pneumonia: the frequency of atypical agents and clinical course
Am J Med
(1996) - et al.
Prospective study of the aetiology and outcome of pneumonia in the community
Lancet
(1987) - et al.
Contemporary use of antibiotics in 1089 adults presenting with acute lower respiratory tract illness in general practice in the U.K.: implications for developing management guidelines
Respir Med
(1997) - et al.
Antibiotics in acute bronchitis: a meta-analysis
Am J Med
(1999) - et al.
Prospective study of aetiology and outcome of adult lower-respiratory-tract infections in the community
Lancet
(1993) - et al.
High agreement but low kappa: II. Resolving the paradoxes
J Clin Epidemiol
(1990) - et al.
Microbial etiology of acute pneumonia in hospitalized patients
Chest
(1992) - et al.
Acute bronchitis in the community: clinical features, infective factors, changes in pulmonary function and bronchial reactivity to histamine
Respir Med
(1990) - et al.
The Alexander Project 1998-2000: susceptibility of pathogens isolated from community-acquired respiratory tract infection to commonly used antimicrobial agents
J Antimicrob Chemother
(2003) - et al.
Management of infections caused by antibiotic-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae
N Engl J Med
(1994)
Prevalence and resistance mechanisms of common bacterial respiratory pathogens
Clin Infect Dis
Preventing the spread of spread of antimicrobial resistance among bacterial respiratory pathogens in industrialized countries: the case for judicious antimicrobial use
Clin Infect Dis
The effect of changes in the consumption of macrolide antibiotics on erythromycin resistance in group A streptococci in Finland. Finnish Study Group for Antimicrobial Resistance
N Engl J Med
Use of antimicrobial agents and drug resistance
N Engl J Med
Antibiotic prescribing and antibiotic resistance in community practice: retrospective study, 1996-8
BMJ
Antibacterial prescribing and antibacterial resistance in English general practice: cross sectional study
BMJ
Understanding the culture of prescribing: qualitative study of general practitioners' and patients' perceptions of antibiotics for sore throats
BMJ
Chlamydia pneumoniae (TWAR): a common agent in acute bronchitis
Scand J Infect Dis
New and emerging etiologies for community-acquired pneumonia with implications for therapy: a prospective multicenter study of 359 cases
Med Baltimore
Antibiotics for coughing in general practice: a qualitative decision analysis
Fam Pract
Van klacht naar diagnose: episodegegevens uit de huisartspraktijk [From complaint to diagnosis: disease episodes in general practice]
Dutch National Survey of General Practice. Morbidity in general practice
Incidence of community-acquired pneumonia in the population of four municipalities in eastern Finland
Am J Epidemiol
Does this patient have community-acquired pneumonia? Diagnosing pneumonia by history and physical examination
JAMA
Diagnosis of pneumonia in adults in general practice: relative importance of typical symptoms and abnormal chest signs evaluated against a radiographic reference standard
Scand J Prim Health Care
Contributions of symptoms, signs, erythrocyte sedimentation rate and C-reactive protein to a diagnosis of pneumonia in acute lower respiratory tract infection
Br J Gen Pract
Antimicrobial agents in lower respiratory tract infections in Dutch general practice
Br J Gen Pract
Initial antibiotic therapy for lower respiratory tract infection in the community: a European survey
Eur Respir J
Cited by (51)
Detection of serum human neutrophil lipocalin is an effective biomarker for the diagnosis and monitoring of children with bacterial infection
2023, Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious DiseaseHNL (Human Neutrophil Lipocalin) and a multimarker approach to the distinction between bacterial and viral infections
2019, Journal of Immunological MethodsCitation Excerpt :The rapid and accurate distinction between the causes of respiratory infections is a major clinical need in order to reduce the misuse of antibiotics (Hopstaken et al., 2005; Dupuy et al., 2013; Quenot et al., 2013; Laxminarayan et al., 2013).
Human neutrophil lipocalin in fMLP-activated whole blood as a diagnostic means to distinguish between acute bacterial and viral infections
2015, Journal of Immunological MethodsCitation Excerpt :The judgment of the doctor of whether to treat the infection with antibiotics is commonly based on clinical symptoms and in some cases supported by laboratory tests such as white blood cell counts, CRP, rapid tests for bacterial or viral agents (Hopstaken et al., 2003). The sensitivities and specificities of such tests, however, often preclude the accurate distinction between various causes of infections with the consequent prescription of antibiotics just in case (Graffelman et al., 2004; Hopstaken et al., 2005). The unnecessary prescription of antibiotics or sales of antibiotics without any prescription over the counter adds to the rapid development of antibiotics resistance, which is seen as a serious threat to mankind (Laxminarayan et al., 2013; Nathan and Cars, 2014).
Predicting the presence of bacterial pathogens in the airways of primary care patients with acute cough
2017, CMAJCitation Excerpt :We also compared C-reactive protein with the outcome at thresholds of greater than 20, greater than 30 and greater than 100 mg/L.7,18–21 The difference in area under the ROC curve was used to evaluate increase in discrimination after adding C-reactive protein or procalcitonin to the reduced combination of symptoms and signs (with fixed regression coefficients for signs and symptoms).4–6,13 C-reactive protein was added dichotomously at above 30 mg/L, because this level was previously shown to add most diagnostic value for pneumonia in cases of lower respiratory tract infection in primary care.7
Disease course of lower respiratory tract infection with a bacterial cause
2016, Annals of Family MedicineEnhanced communication skills and C-reactive protein point-of-care testing for respiratory tract infection: 3.5-year followup of a cluster randomized trial
2013, Annals of Family MedicineCitation Excerpt :By taking an illness-focused approach, accurate communication between patient and physician can improve the appropriateness of prescribing antibiotics, particularly when the family physician is certain of the diagnosis.4 When the physician is dealing with diagnostic uncertainty, using point-of-care biomarkers may be helpful in targeting inappropriate antibiotic prescribing, as clinical judgment alone lacks specificity in differentiating serious from mild infection.22 Because an illness-focused intervention will appeal to the patient's interest, one would expect that solid evidence-based information from the physician could lower future office visit rates.
The study was supported by a grant from the Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht.