Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T04:28:36.315Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Derivation and Validation of a Clinical Prediction Score for Isolation of Inpatients With Suspected Pulmonary Tuberculosis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Kara S. Rakoczy ,
Stuart H. Cohen  and
Hien H. Nguyen
Kara S. Rakoczy
Affiliation:
Divisions of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, University of California, Davis Health System, Sacramento, California
Stuart H. Cohen
Affiliation:
Infectious Diseases, University of California, Davis Health System, Sacramento, California
Hien H. Nguyen*
Affiliation:
Divisions of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, University of California, Davis Health System, Sacramento, California Infectious Diseases, University of California, Davis Health System, Sacramento, California
*
4150 V. Street, Suite G500, Sacramento, CA95817 (hien.nguyen@ucdmc.ucdavis.edu)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background.

The use of a clinical prediction score to improve the practice of instituting airborne-transmission precautions in patients with suspected tuberculosis holds promise for increasing appropriate isolation and decreasing unnecessary isolation. The objective of this study was to derive and validate a clinical prediction score for patients with suspected tuberculosis.

Methods.

We used a case—control study design to evaluate differences between patients with a diagnosis of tuberculosis and those placed under airborne precautions who had negative culture results. We developed risk scores based on a multivariable analysis of independently significant factors associated with tuberculosis. Subsequently, we evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of the score in a separate (validation) cohort of patients.

Results.

Within our population, we found 4 clinical factors associated with tuberculosis: chronic symptoms (odds ratio [OR], 10.2 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 2.95-35.4]), upper lobe disease on chest radiograph (OR, 5.27 [95% CI, 1.6-17.23]), foreign-born status (OR, 7.01 [95% CI, 2.1-23.8]), and immunocompromised state other than human immunodeficiency virus infection (OR, 8.14 [95% CI, 2.08-31.8]). Shortness of breath (OR, 0.13 [95% CI, 0.04-0.45]) was found to be associated with non-tuberculosis diagnoses and considered a negative predictor in the model. Using a cut-off point to maximize sensitivity, we applied the prediction rule to the validation cohort, resulting in a sensitivity of 97% and a specificity of 42%.

Conclusion.

The tuberculosis prediction rule derived from our patient population could improve utilization of airborne precautions. Clinical prediction rules continue to show their utility for improvement in isolation practices in different demographic areas.

Type
Original Article
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 29 , Issue 10 , October 2008 , pp. 927 - 932
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Guidelines for preventing the transmission of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in health-care facilities, 2005. MMWR Recomm Rep 2005;54:1–141.Google Scholar
2.Sokolove, PE, Rossman, L, Cohen, SH. The emergency department presentation of patients with active pulmonary tuberculosis. Acad Emerg Med 2000;7:1056–1060.Google Scholar
3.Scott, B, Schmid, M, Nettleman, MD. Early identification and isolation of inpatients at high risk for tuberculosis. Arch Intern Med 1994;154:326–330.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Wisnivesky, J, Kaplan, J, Henschke, C, McGinn, TG, Crystal, RG. Evaluation of clinical parameters to predict Mycobacterium tuberculosis in inpatients. Arch Intern Med 2000;160:2471–2476.Google Scholar
5.Wisnivesky, J, Henschke, C, Balentine, J, Willner, C, Deloire, AM, McGinn, TG. Prospective validation of a prediction model for isolating inpatients with suspected pulmonary tuberculosis. Arch Intern Med 2005;165:453–457.Google Scholar
6.Pegues, C, Johnson, DC, Pegues, DA. Implementation and evaluation of an algorithm for isolation of patients with suspected pulmonary tuberculosis. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1996;17:412–418.Google Scholar
7.Bock, NN, McGowan, JE, Ahn, J. Clinical predictors of tuberculosis as a guide for a respiratory isolation policy. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1996;154:1468–1472.Google Scholar
8.Knirsch, CA, Jain, NL, Pablos-Mendez, A, Friedman, C, Hripcsak, G. Respiratory isolation of tuberculosis patients using clinical guidelines and an automated clinical decision support system. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1998;19:94–100.Google Scholar
9.Tattevin, P, Casalino, E, Fleury, L, Egmann, G, Ruel, M, Bouvet, E. The validity of medical history, classic symptoms, and chest radiographs in predicting pulmonary tuberculosis. Chest 1999;115:1248–1253.Google Scholar
10.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Reported tuberculosis in the United States, 2006. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and Human Services, CDC; September 2007.Google Scholar
11.Cohen, R, Muzaffar, S, Capellan, J, Azar, H, Chinikamwala, M. The validity of classic symptoms and chest radiographic configuration in predicting pulmonary tuberculosis. Chest 1996;109:420–512.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Randolph, AG, Guyatt, GH, Calvin, JE, et al.Understanding articles describing clinical prediction tools. Crit Care Med 1998;26:1603–1612.Google Scholar
13.Slovis, BS, Plitman, JD. The case against anergy testing as a routine adjunct to tuberculin skin testing. JAMA 2000;283:2003–2007.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14.Poduval, RD, Hammes, MS. Tuberculosis screening in dialysis patients—is the tuberculin test effective? Clinical Nephrology 2003;59:436–440.Google Scholar
15.American Thoracic Society (ATS). ATS guidelines: diagnostic standards and classification of tuberculosis in adults and children. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2000;161:1376–1395.Google Scholar
16.Wolfe, F, Michaud, K, Anderson, J, Urbansky, K. Tuberculosis infection in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and the effect of infliximab therapy. Arthritis Rheum 2004;50:372–379.Google Scholar
17.Gomez-Reino, JJ, Carmona, L, Valverde, VR, Mola, EM, Montero, MD. Treatment of rheumatoid arthritis with tumor necrosis factor inhibitors may predispose to significant increase in tuberculosis risk: a multicenter active-surveillance report. Arthritis Rheum 2003;48:2122–2127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18.Feingold, AO. Association of tuberculosis with alcoholism. South Med J 1976;69:1336–1337.Google Scholar
19.Friedman, LN, Sullivan, GM, Bevilaqua, RP, Loscos, R. Tuberculosis screening in alcoholics and drug addicted. Am Rev Resp Dis 1987;136:1188–1192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20.Macgregor, RR. Alcohol and immune defense. JAMA 1986;256:1474–1479.Google Scholar
21.Pitchenik, AE, Rubinson, HA. Radiographic appearance of tuberculosis in patients with the acquired immune deficiency syndrome. Am Rev Respir Dis 1985;131:393–396.Google Scholar
22.Cobo, J, Oliva, J, Asensio, A, et al.Predicting tuberculosis among HIV-infected patients admitted to hospital: comparison of a model with clinical judgment of infectious diseases specialists. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2001;20:779–784.Google Scholar