How critical is timing for the diagnosis of influenza in general practice?

QUESTIONS UNDER STUDY: The diagnostic significance of clinical symptoms/signs of influenza has mainly been assessed in the context of controlled studies with stringent inclusion criteria. There was a need to extend the evaluation of these predictors not only in the context of general practice but also according to the duration of symptoms and to the dynamics of the epidemic. PRINCIPLES: A prospective study conducted in the Medical Outpatient Clinic in the winter season 1999-2000. Patients with influenza-like syndrome were included, as long as the primary care physician envisaged the diagnosis of influenza. The physician administered a questionnaire, a throat swab was performed and a culture acquired to document the diagnosis of influenza. RESULTS: 201 patients were included in the study. 52% were culture positive for influenza. By univariate analysis, temperature >37.8 degrees C (OR 4.2; 95% CI 2.3-7.7), duration of symptoms <48 hours (OR 3.2; 1.8-5.7), cough (OR 3.2; 1-10.4) and myalgia (OR 2.8; 1.0-7.5) were associated with a diagnosis of influenza. In a multivariable logistic analysis, the best model predicting influenza was the association of a duration of symptom <48 hours, medical attendance at the beginning of the epidemic (weeks 49-50), fever >37.8 and cough, with a sensitivity of 79%, specificity of 69%, positive predictive value of 67%, negative predictive value of 73% and an area under the ROC curve of 0.74. CONCLUSIONS: Besides relevant symptoms and signs, the physician should also consider the duration of symptoms and the epidemiological context (start, peak or end of the epidemic) in his appraisal, since both parameters considerably modify the value of the clinical predictors when assessing the probability of a patient having influenza.

Image guided critical screw placement precision in the cervical spine : important or incidental? : results of a series of 91 consecutive cases using OVEM

Study design: A retrospective study of image guided cervical implant placement precision. Objective: To describe a simple and precise classification of cervical critical screw placement. Summary of Background Data: "Critical" screw placement is defined as implant insertion into a bone corridor which is surrounded circumferentially by neurovascular structures. While the use of image guidance has improved accuracy, there is currently no classification which provides sufficient precision to assess the navigation success of critical cervical screw placement. Methods: Based on postoperative clinical evaluation and CT imaging, the orthogonal view evaluation method (OVEM) is used to classify screw accuracy into grade I (no cortical breach), grade la (screw thread cortical breach), grade II (internal diameter cortical breach) and grade III (major cortical breach causing neural or vascular injury). Grades II and III are considered to be navigation failures, after accounting for bone corridor / screw mismatch (minimal diameter of targeted bone corridor being smaller than an outer screw diameter). Results: A total of 276 screws from 91 patients were classified into grade I (64.9%), grade la (18.1%), and grade II (17.0%). No grade III screw was observed. The overall rate of navigation failure was 13%. Multiple logistic regression indicated that navigational failure was significantly associated with the level of instrumentation and the navigation system used. Navigational failure was rare (1.6%) when the margin around the screw in the bone corridor was larger than 1.5 mm. Conclusions: OVEM evaluation appears to be a useful tool to assess the precision of critical screw placement in the cervical spine. The OVEM validity and reliability need to be addressed. Further correlation with clinical outcomes will be addressed in future studies.