Evaluation of housestaff physicians’ preparation and interpretation of sputum gram stains for communityacquired pneumonia
Tóm tắt
Objective:To evaluate the preparation and interpretation of sputum Gram stains by housestaff physicians in the assessment of patients with community-acquired pneumonia. Design:A prospective, multicenter study. Setting:Two university-affiliated hospitals in Pittsburgh. Patients:Ninety-nine cases of clinically and radiographically established pneumonia occurring in 97 patients. Diagnostic test assessment:Housestaff and microbiology personnel prepared a Gram stain for each case of pneumonia. Housestaff assessed the presence and identity of a predominant microbial organism on the slides they prepared. Two senior staff microbiologists, blinded to patient and preparer, evaluated all slides for preparation, sputum purulence, and identification of the predominant organism. Two reference standards were used to assess the sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of housestaff’s Gram-stain interpretations: 1) senior staff microbiologists’ determinations of the microbes present using the slides without benefit of culture results, and 2) the etiologic agent derived from results of sputum culture, blood culture, or serology. Measurements and main results:Housestaff physicians completed a Gram stain in 58% of the pneumonia episodes. Gram stains were not made in 42% of cases, primarily because patients were unable to produce sputum. Fifteen percent of housestaff’s smears were judged inadequately prepared, compared with 3% for the laboratory personnel (p<0.01). Housestaff obtained purulent sputum samples significantly more often than did nursing personnel (58% versus 38%; p<0.01). Housestaff’s Gram stains were 90% sensitive for detecting pneumococcus, with a 50% falsepositive rate. The sensitivity of the Gram stain was less for identification of Haemophilus influenzaethan for identification of Streptococcus pneumoniae.A single antimicrobial agent was chosen as initial therapy for 50% of the patients in whom housestaff identified a predominant organism, compared with 30% in whom a predominant organism was not identified (p≤0.05). Conclusions:Although housestaff obtained purulent sputum samples more frequently than did nursing personnel, they made systematic errors in the preparation and interpretation of Gram-stained slides. Housestaff physicians should receive formal training in the preparation and interpretation of Gram stains; the specific defects elucidated in this study warrant special attention.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Hirschmann JV, Murray JF. Pneumonia and lung abscess. In: Braunwald E, Isselbacher KJ, Petersdorf RG, Wilson JD, Martin JB, Fauci AS, eds. Harrison’sPrinciples of Internal Medicine (eleventh edition). New York: McGraw-Hill, 1987;1075–82.
Donowitz GR, Mandell GL. Acute pneumonia. In: Mandell GL, Douglas GR, Bennet JE, eds.Principles and practices of infectious diseases. New York: Churchill-Livingstone; 1990:540–54.
Toews GB. Approach to the patient with suspected pneumonia. In: Kelly WM, Devita VT, Dupont HL, et al., eds.Textbook of internal medicine. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott, 1989;2076–82.
Rein MF, Gwaltney JM, O’Brien WM, Jennings RH, Mandell GL. Accuracy of Gram’s stain in identifying pneumococci in sputum. JAMA. 1978;239:2671–3.
Kalin M, Lindberg AA, Tunevall G. Etiologic diagnosis of bacterial pneumonia by Gram stain and quantitative culture of expectorates. Scand J Infect Dis. 1983;15:153–60.
Gleckman R, Devita J, Hibert D, Pelletier C, Martin R. Sputum Gram stain assessment in community-acquired bacteremic pneumonia. J Clin Microbiol, 1988;26:846–9.
Thorsteinsson SB, Musher DM, Fagan. The diagnostic value of sputum culture in acute pneumonia. JAMA. 1975;233:894–5.
Heineman HS, Chawla JK, Lofton WM. Misinformation from sputum cultures without microscopic examination. J Clin Microbiol. 1977;6:518–27.
Boerner DF, Zwadyk P. The value of sputum Gram’s stain in community-acquired pneumonia. JAMA. 1982;247:642–5.
Geckler RW, McAllister K, Gremillion DH, Ellenbogen C. Clinical value of paired sputum and transtracheal aspirates in the initial management of pneumonia. Chest. 1985;87:631–5.
Fang GD, Fine MF, Orloff JJ, et al. New and emerging etiologies for community-acquired pneumonia with implications for therapy: a prospective study of 359 cases.Medicine. 1990;69:307–16.
Murray PR, Washington JA II. Microscopic and bacteriologic analysis of expectorated sputum. Mayo Clin Proc. 1975;50:339–44.
Sackett DL, Haynes RB, Tugwell P. The interpretation of diagnostic data. In:Clinical epideiology—a basic science for clinical medicine. Boston: Litle, Brown, 1985;71–3.
Kuzma JW. The chi-square test. In:Basic statistics for the health sciences. Palo Alto, CA: Mayfield, 1984;141–55.
In-patient utilization of short stay hospitals by diagnosis. United States 1983. Annual Summary National Center for Health Statistics, USDHHS, Gwalltney J, O’Brien WM, Jennings RH, Mandell GL. Data from the National Health Survey, Series 13, No. 72 (DHA publication no. PHS-83-1733) Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1983.
Sackett DL, Haynes RB, Tugwell P. Making a prognosis. In:Clinical epidemiology—a basic science for clinical medicine. Boston: Little, Brown, 1985:159–70.
Perlino CH. Laboratory diagnosis of pneumonia due toStreptococcus pneuoniae. J Infect Dis. 1985;150:139–44.
Geckler RW, Gremillion DH, McAllister CK, Ellenbogen C. Microscopic and bacteriologic comparison of paired sputa and transtracheal aspirates. J Clin Microbiol. 1977;6:396–9.
Drew WL. Value of sputum culture in diagnosis of pneumonococcal pneumonia. J Clin Microbiol. 1977;6:62–5.
Guckian JC, Christensen WD. Quantitative culture and Gram sain of sputum in pneumonia. Am Rev Resp Dis. 1978;118:997–1005.
Barrett-Conner E. The nonvalue of sputum culture in the diagnosis of bacteria pneumonia. Am Rev Resp Dis. 1971;103:845–8.
Rathburn HK, Govani L. Mouse inoculation as a means of identifying pneumococci in the sputum. Johns Hopkins Med J. 1967;120:46–8.
Shinwarie MN. The comparative value of sputum and blood cultures in the diagnosis of acute bacerial pneumonia. J Indiana State Med Assoc. 1987;139–41.
Lentino JR, Lucks DA. The nonvalue of sputum culture in the management of lower respiratory tract infections. J Clin Microbiol. 1987;25:758–62.
LaForce FM. Community-acquired lower respiratory tract infections—prevention and cost-control strategies. Am J Med. 1985;78(suppl B):52–7.