0
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
The Rational Clinical Examination | Clinician's Corner

Does This Patient Have Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia?

Michael Klompas, MD
JAMA. 2007;297(14):1583-1593. doi:10.1001/jama.297.14.1583.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Context Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is a common and serious nosocomial infection. Accurate, timely diagnosis enables affected patients to receive appropriate therapy and avoids mistreatment of patients having other conditions.

Objective To review the published medical literature describing the precision and accuracy of clinical, radiographic, and laboratory data to diagnose bacterial VAP relative to a histological gold standard.

Data Sources English-language articles identified by a structured search strategy using MEDLINE (January 1966-October 31, 2006) and Google Scholar. Additional articles were identified through the reference lists of studies and review papers identified by the search strategy.

Study Selection Included studies described clinical findings associated with VAP in 25 or more patients receiving mechanical ventilation who subsequently underwent pulmonary biopsy or autopsy. Fourteen studies describing clinical findings in 655 patients met inclusion criteria.

Data Extraction Data were abstracted onto a structured form, allowing calculation of the likelihood ratios (LRs) for each sign or combination of findings.

Data Synthesis The presence or absence of fever, abnormal white blood cell count, or purulent pulmonary secretions do not substantively alter the probability of VAP. However, the combination of a new radiographic infiltrate with at least 2 of fever, leukocytosis, or purulent sputum increases the likelihood of VAP (summary LR, 2.8; 95% confidence interval, 0.97-7.9). The absence of a new infiltrate on a plain chest radiograph lowers the likelihood of VAP (summary LR, 0.35; 95% confidence interval, 0.14-0.87). Fewer than 50% neutrophils on cell count analysis of lower pulmonary secretions makes VAP unlikely (LR range, 0.05-0.10).

Conclusions Routine bedside evaluation coupled with radiographic information provides suggestive but not definitive evidence that VAP is present or absent. Given the severity of VAP and the frequency of serious conditions that can mimic VAP, clinicians should be ready to consider additional tests that provide further evidence for VAP or that establish another diagnosis.

Sign in

Create a free personal account to sign up for alerts, share articles, and more.

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal

Figures

Tables

References

Letters

CME


You need to register in order to view this quiz.

Multimedia

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Web of Science® Times Cited: 90

Sign in

Create a free personal account to sign up for alerts, share articles, and more.

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

See Also...
Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles
Jobs
JAMAevidence.com

The Rational Clinical Examination
Clinical Scenarios

The Rational Clinical Examination
Patient Scenario

brightcove.createExperiences();