Elevated inflammatory markers combined with positive pneumococcal urinary antigen are a good predictor of pneumococcal community-acquired pneumonia in children.

BACKGROUND: Our objective was to evaluate procalcitonin (PCT) and C-reactive protein (CRP) as predictors of a pneumococcal etiology in community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in hospitalized children. METHODS: Children requiring hospitalization for CAP were prospectively enrolled. The following indices were determined: antibodies against pneumococcal surface proteins (anti-PLY, pneumococcal histidine triad D, pneumococcal histidine triad E, LytB and pneumococcal choline-binding protein A), viral serology, nasopharyngeal cultures and polymerase chain reaction for 13 respiratory viruses, blood pneumococcal polymerase chain reaction, pneumococcal urinary antigen, PCT and CRP. Presumed pneumococcal CAP (P-CAP) was defined as a positive blood culture or polymerase chain reaction for Streptococcus pneumoniae or as a pneumococcal surface protein seroresponse (≥2-fold increase). RESULTS: Seventy-five patients were included from which 37 (49%) met the criteria of P-CAP. Elevated PCT and CRP values were strongly associated with P-CAP with odds ratios of 23 (95% confidence interval: 5-117) for PCT and 19 (95% confidence interval: 5-75) for CRP in multivariate analysis. The sensitivity was 94.4% for PCT (cutoff: 1.5 ng/mL) and 91.9% for CRP (cutoff: 100 mg/L). A value≤0.5 ng/mL of PCT ruled out P-CAP in >90% of cases (negative likelihood ratio: 0.08). Conversely, a PCT value≥1.5 ng/mL associated with a positive pneumococcal urinary antigen had a diagnostic probability for P-CAP of almost 80% (positive likelihood ratio: 4.59). CONCLUSIONS: PCT and CRP are reliable predictors of P-CAP. Low cutoff values of PCT allow identification of children at low risk of P-CAP. The association of elevated PCT or CRP with a positive pneumococcal urinary antigen is a strong predictor of P-CAP.

Construct validity of the French version of the PRWE (Patient Rated Wrist Evaluation) with the French version of the DASH (Disabilities Arm Shoulder and Hand) is good to very good in a population of patients with wrist injuries in an inpatient rehabilitation unit

Objective.- The Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation is a specific questionnaire for the wrist [1]. It consists of 15 questions with a total score of 100. It was recently translated into French [2]. However, its validity has not been tested in this language. The Disabilities Arm Shoulder and Hand (DASH), with well-established psychometric properties, is considered as the reference questionnaire for the evaluation of upper extremities. The objective of this study is to measure the construct validity of the PRWE-F with the DASH-F in patients with wrist pathology.Patients and methods.- Fifty-one patients (40 m, 11 w, mean age 42 years), 25 fractures of the radius and 26 lesions of the carpus.Questionnaires PRWE-F and DASH-F at entry and at discharge (0 to 100). Calculation of the construct validity of the PRWE-F comparing with the DASH-F with Pearson correlation coefficients (r) at entry and at discharge. Level of significance (alpha) was set at 5%.Results.- Correlation DASH/PRWE at entry: r = 0.799 (95% CI 0.671 to 0.881), P < 0.0001. Correlation DASH/PRWE at discharge: r = 0.847 (95% CI: 0.745 to 0.910), P < 0.0001.Discussion.- The construct validity of the two instruments indicates that they measure the same concept. Our correlation between DASH-F and PRWE-F, going from 0.799 to 0.847, are comparable to those published in different languages (0.71 to 0.84) [3,4]. The questionnaires PRWE-F can thus be used in rehabilitation patients presenting with wrist pathologies; it is comparable to the DASH but described by MacDermid [1] to be more specific. Compared to the DASH it has the advantage of consisting of two dimensions. Its construct validity is excellent. This questionnaire should be evaluated in other populations, and it should be compared with hand questionnaires more specific than the DASH.

Multivitamins/multiminerals in Switzerland: not as good as it seems.

BACKGROUND: Multivitamin/multimineral (MVM) supplements are commonly consumed by the general population, but little is known regarding their composition and compliance with local regulations. We assessed the composition and compliance with regulations [no indication in the label of vitamin/minerals amounting <15% of the acceptable daily intake (ADI)] of MVM available in Switzerland. METHODS: The composition of vitamin/minerals supplements was obtained from the Swiss drug compendium, the Internet, pharmacies, parapharmacies and supermarkets. MVM was defined as the presence of at least 5 vitamins and/or minerals. RESULTS: Of the 254 vitamin/mineral supplements collected, 95 (37%) were considered as MVM. The most frequent vitamins were B₆ (73.7%), C (71.6%), B₂ (69.5%) and B₁ (67.4%); the least frequent were K (17.9%), biotin (51.6%), pantothene (55.8%) and E (56.8%). Approximately half of MVMs provided >150% of the ADI for vitamins. The most frequent minerals were zinc (66.3%), calcium (55.8%), magnesium (54.7%) and copper (48.4%), and the least frequent were fluoride (3.2%), phosphorous (17.9%), chrome (22.1%) and iodine (25%). More than two thirds of MVMs provided between 50 and 150% of the ADI for minerals, and few MVMs provided >150% of the ADI. While few MVMs provided <15% of the ADI for vitamins, a considerable fraction did so for minerals (32.7% for magnesium, 26.1% for copper and 22.6% for calcium). CONCLUSION: There is a great variability regarding the composition of MVMs available in Switzerland. Several MVM do not comply with Swiss regulations, which calls for monitoring and corrective measures.

Coronary artery disease screening in diabetic patients: how good is guideline adherence?

INTRODUCTION: Diabetic patients are at high risk for coronary artery disease (CAD), which is the leading cause of death in this population. The Swiss Society of Endocrinology-Diabetology (SSED) recommends CAD screening for diabetic patients with > or = 2 additional cardiovascular risk factors (CVRF), by stress echocardiography (SE) or myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI). The aim of this study was to assess the application of these guidelines and the treatment of CVRF in the diabetes outpatient clinics of the five Swiss University Hospitals. METHODS: The study was initiated in Lausanne and the study questionnaires were circulated to the endocrinologists of the five Swiss University Hospitals. Practitioners were asked to include consecutive patients attending the diabetes outpatient clinics over one month. Prevalence of CAD, screening methods for CAD, prevalence of CVRF, biological analyses over the last 6 months and medical therapy were recorded. RESULTS: A total of 302 subjects were included. The mean age was 53 +/- 14 years, 68% had type 2 diabetes, 27% type 1 and 5% other types. Among T2DM with > or = 2 CVRF, 45% were screened for CAD according to SSED guidelines. In T2DM 25% had blood pressure < or = 130/80 mm Hg, 15% a lipid profile within target, 23% HbA1c < or = 7.0%. Overall, 2% achieved all 3 targets. CONCLUSIONS: Only 45% of T2DM with > or = 2 CVRF were screened for CAD according to SSED guidelines and 2% of T2DM had proper control over all CVRF. Efforts are still necessary to improve CAD prevention and screening of diabetic patients in Swiss University Hospitals.