Mar 1;44 Suppl 2:S America/American Thoracic Society consensus guidelines on the management of community-acquired pneumonia in adults. Keywords: Community-acquired pneumonia, ICU admission, arterial .. The IDSA/ATS CAP Guidelines major criteria including the pH. Pneumonia In Adults Adapted from: IDSA/ATS CONSENSUS GUIDELINES Mandell LA, Wunderlink RG, Anzueto A, et al. Guidelines on the Management of Community-Acquired Pneumonia in Adults. Clin Infect Dis. ;(Suppl 2).

Author: Tokasa Daktilar
Country: Poland
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Marketing
Published (Last): 10 August 2015
Pages: 411
PDF File Size: 9.83 Mb
ePub File Size: 19.19 Mb
ISBN: 125-4-80823-201-2
Downloads: 69892
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Guzuru

Wunderink, Antonio Anzueto, John G. Douglas Campbell, Nathan C. Niederman, Antonio Torres, Cynthia G. Improving the care of adult communityy with community-acquired pneumonia CAP has been the focus of many different organizations, and several have developed guidelines for management of CAP.

The guidelines are intended primarily for use by emergency medicine physicians, hospitalists, and primary care practitioners; however, the extensive literature evaluation suggests that they are also an appropriate starting point for consultation by specialists. Substantial overlap exists among the patients whom these guidelines address and those discussed in the recently published guidelines for health care-associated pneumonia HCAP. Pneumonia in nonambulatory guideoines of nursing homes and other long-term care facilities epidemiologically mirrors hospital-acquired pneumonia and should be treated according to the HCAP guidelines.

IDSA CAP Guidelines

However, certain other patients whose conditions are included in the designation of HCAP are better served by management in accordance with CAP guidelines with concern for specific pathogens. Implementation of Guideline Recommendations.

Locally adapted guidelines should be implemented to improve process of care variables and relevant clinical outcomes. Strong recommendation; level I evidence. Enthusiasm for developing these guidelines derives, in large part, from evidence that previous CAP guidelines have led to improvement in clinically relevant outcomes.

Consistently beneficial effects in clinically relevant parameters listed in table 3 followed the introduction of a comprehensive protocol including a combination of components from table 2 that increased compliance with published guidelines.

The first recommendation, therefore, is that CAP management guidelines be locally adapted and implemented. CAP guidelines should address a comprehensive set of elements in the process of care rather than a single element in isolation. Strong recommendation; level III evidence. Development of local CAP guidelines should be directed toward improvement in specific and clinically relevant outcomes.

Moderate recommendation; level III evidence. Almost all of the major decisions regarding management of CAP, including diagnostic and treatment issues, revolve around the initial assessment of severity.

Severity-of-illness scores, such as the CURB criteria c onfusion, u remia, r espiratory rate, low b lood pressure, age 65 years or greateror prognostic models, such as the Pneumonia Severity Index PSIcan be used to identify patients with CAP who may be candidates for outpatient treatment.

Objective criteria or scores should always be supplemented with physician determination of subjective factors, including the ability to safely and reliably take oral medication and the availability of outpatient support resources. Gukdelines recommendation; level II evidence. Physicians often admit patients to the hospital who could be well managed as outpatients and who would generally acuqired to be treated as outpatients.

Objective scores, such as the CURB score or the PSI, can assist in identifying patients who may be appropriate for outpatient care, but the use of such scores must be tempered by the physician’s determination of additional critical factors, including the ability to safely and reliably take oral medication and the availability of outpatient support resources.

Direct admission to an ICU is required for patients with septic shock requiring vasopressors or with acute respiratory failure requiring intubation and mechanical ventilation. Direct admission to an ICU or high-level monitoring unit is recommended for patients with 3 of the minor criteria for severe CAP listed in table 4.

Moderate recommendation; level II evidence. In some studies, a significant percentage of patients with CAP are transferred to the ICU in the first 24—48 h after hospitalization.

Mortality and morbidity among these patients appears to be greater than those pneumonja patients admitted 20007 to the ICU. Conversely, ICU resources are often overstretched in many institutions, and the admission of patients with CAP who would not directly benefit from ICU care is also problematic.

Unfortunately, none of the published criteria for severe CAP adequately distinguishes these patients from those for whom ICU admission is necessary. In the present set of guidelines, a new set of criteria has been developed on the basis of data on individual risks, although the previous ATS criteria format is retained. The presence of at least 3 of these criteria suggests the need for ICU care but will require prospective validation.


In addition to a constellation of suggestive clinical features, a demonstrable infiltrate by chest radiograph or other imaging technique, with or without supporting microbiological data, is required for the diagnosis of pneumonia.

Patients with CAP should be investigated for pneumoniia pathogens that would significantly alter standard empirical management decisions, when the presence of such pathogens is suspected on the basis of clinical and epidemiologic clues.

Recommendations for diagnostic testing remain controversial. The overall low yield and infrequent positive impact on clinical care argue against the routine use of common tests, such as blood and sputum cultures. Conversely, these cultures may have a major impact on the care of an individual patient and are important for epidemiologic reasons, including the antibiotic susceptibility patterns used to develop treatment guidelines.

A list of clinical indications for more pneuomnia diagnostic testing table 5 was, therefore, developed, primarily on the acquuired of 2 criteria: Routine diagnostic tests to identify an etiologic diagnosis are optional for outpatients with CAP. Pretreatment blood samples for culture and an expectorated sputum sample for stain and culture in patients with a productive cough should be obtained from hospitalized patients with the clinical indications listed pneumojia table 5 but are optional for patients without these conditions.

Moderate recommendation; level I evidence. Pretreatment Gram stain and culture of expectorated sputum should be performed only if a good-quality specimen can be obtained and quality performance measures for collection, transport, and processing of samples can be met. Patients with severe CAP, as defined above, should at least have blood samples drawn for culture, urinary antigen tests for Legionella pneumophila and Streptococcus pneumoniae performed, and expectorated sputum samples collected for culture.

For intubated patients, an endotracheal aspirate sample should be obtained. The most pnekmonia indication for extensive diagnostic testing is in the critically ill CAP patient. Such patients should at least have blood drawn for culture and an endotracheal aspirate obtained if they are intubated; consideration should be given to more extensive testing, including urinary antigen tests for L. For inpatients without the clinical indications listed in table 5diagnostic testing is optional but should not be considered wrong.

Empirical antibiotic recommendations table 7 have not changed significantly from those in previous guidelines. Increasing evidence has strengthened the recommendation for combination empirical therapy for severe CAP. Only 1 recently released antibiotic has guieelines added to the recommendations: At present, the committee is awaiting further evaluation of the safety of telithromycin by the US Food and Drug Administration before making its final recommendation regarding this drug.

Recommendations are generally for a class of antibiotics rather than for a specific drug, unless outcome data clearly favor one drug. Because overall efficacy remains good for many classes of agents, the more potent drugs are given preference because of their benefit in decreasing the risk of selection for antibiotic resistance.

Previously healthy and no risk factors for drug-resistant S. A macrolide azithromycin, clarithromycin, or erythromycin strong recommendation; level I evidence. Presence of comorbidities, such as chronic heart, lung, liver, or renal disease; diabetes mellitus; alcoholism; malignancies; asplenia; immunosuppressing conditions or use of immunosuppressing drugs; use of antimicrobials within the previous 3 months in which case an alternative from a different class should be selected ; or other risks pnwumonia DRSP infection:.

A respiratory fluoroquinolone moxifloxacin, gemifloxacin, or levofloxacin [ mg] strong recommendation; level I evidence B. A respiratory fluoroquinolone should be used for penicillin-allergic patients. Odsa resistance rates have suggested that empirical therapy with a macrolide alone can be used only for the treatment of carefully selected hospitalized patients with nonsevere disease and without risk factors for infection with drug-resistant pathogens.

However, such monotherapy cannot be routinely recommended. For community-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection, add vancomycin or linezolid. Infections with the overwhelming majority of CAP pathogens will tas adequately treated by use of the recommended empirical regimens. The emergence of methicillin-resistant S. However, diagnostic tests are likely to be of high yield for these pathogens, allowing early discontinuation of empirical treatment if results are negative.

The risk factors are included in the table 5 recommendations for indications for increased diagnostic testing. Pathogens suspected on the basis of epidemiologic considerations. Risk factors for other uncommon etiologies of CAP are listed in table 8and recommendations for treatment are included in table 9. Once the etiology of CAP has been identified on the basis of reliable microbiological methods, antimicrobial therapy should be directed at that pathogen.


Early treatment within 48 h of the onset of symptoms clmmunity oseltamivir or zanamivir is recommended for influenza A. Patients with an illness compatible with influenza and with known exposure to poultry in areas with previous H5N1 infection should be tested for H5N1 infection. In patients with suspected H5N1 infection, droplet precautions and careful routine infection control measures should be used until an H5N1 infection is ruled out.

Patients with suspected H5N1 infection should be treated with oseltamivir level II evidence and antibacterial agents targeting S. For patients admitted through the emergency department EDthe first antibiotic dose should be administered while still in the ED.

Rather than designating a specific window in which to initiate treatment, the committee felt that hospitalized patients with CAP should receive the first antibiotic dose in the ED.

Community Acquired Pneumonia Guidelines

Switch from intravenous to oral therapy. Patients should be switched from intravenous to oral commmunity when they are hemodynamically stable and improving clinically, are able to ingest medications, and have idas normally functioning gastrointestinal tract. Patients should be discharged as soon as they are clinically stable, have no other active medical problems, and have a safe environment for continued care. Inpatient observation while receiving oral therapy cpmmunity not necessary.

Patients with CAP should be treated for a minimum of 5 days level I evidenceshould be afebrile for 48—72 h, and should have no more than 1 CAP-associated sign of clinical instability table 10 before discontinuation of therapy level II evidence. A longer duration of therapy may be needed if initial therapy was not active against the identified pathogen or if it was complicated by extrapulmonary infection, such as meningitis or endocarditis.

Weak recommendation; level III evidence. Patients with CAP who have persistent septic shock despite adequate fluid cojmunity should be considered for treatment with drotrecogin alfa activated within 24 h of admission. Weak recommendation; level II evidence. Hypotensive, fluid-resuscitated patients with severe CAP should be screened for occult adrenal insufficiency.

The use of a systematic classification of possible causes of failure to respond, based on time of onset and type of failure table 11is recommended. A systematic approach to these patients table 11 acquirfd help to determine the cause.

The intranasally administered live attenuated vaccine is an alternative vaccine formulation for some persons 5—49 accquired of idaa without chronic underlying diseases, including immunodeficiency, asthma, or chronic medical conditions. Health care workers in inpatient and outpatient settings and long-term care facilities should receive annual influenza immunization. Vaccination status should be assessed at the time of hospital admission for all patients, especially those with medical illnesses.

Vaccination may be performed either at hospital discharge or during outpatient treatment. Influenza vaccine should be offered to persons at hospital discharge or during outpatient treatment during the fall and winter.

Smoking cessation should be a goal for persons hospitalized with CAP who smoke. Smokers who will not quit should also be vaccinated for both pneumococcus and influenza. Cases of pneumonia that are of public health concern should be reported immediately to the state or local health department. Respiratory hygiene measures, including the use of hand hygiene and masks or tissues for patients with cough, acquirrd be used in outpatient settings and EDs as a means to reduce the spread of respiratory infections.

Improving the care of patients with community-acquired pneumonia CAP has been the focus of many different organizations.

Such efforts at improvement in care are warranted, because CAP, together with influenza, remains the seventh leading cause of death in the United States [ 1 ]. Despite advances in antimicrobial therapy, rates of mortality due to pneumonia have not decreased significantly since penicillin became routinely available [ 3 ].