Research Article

DIAGNOSING MENINGITIS AT THE EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT – HOW ACCURATE ARE WE?

Volume: 2 Number: 2 August 26, 2020
EN

DIAGNOSING MENINGITIS AT THE EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT – HOW ACCURATE ARE WE?

Abstract

Objectives: Meningitis is associated with a high mortality rate and neurologic sequelae are common among survivors. However, it is a diagnostic challenge and can be under-recognized at the Emergency Department (ED). We aimed to determine the accuracy of the diagnosis of meningitis made in the ED and identify features associated with diagnostic accuracy. Methods: A retrospective review of case records was carried out. Cases presenting to the ED an urban tertiary center from 2013 to 2017 with a diagnosis of meningitis in its records were selected. Information about patient demographics, clinical features and course were collected for analysis. Accuracy was determined by comparing the ED diagnosis with discharge diagnosis on inpatient record. Results: There were 83 cases of meningitis diagnosed in the ED during the study period. The median age was 36 (range 15 to 96) years old and 54 (65.1%) of the patients were male. Fever (n=76, 91.6%), headache (n=50, 60.2%) and altered mental status (n=24, 28.9%) were the most common symptoms and neck stiffness (n=28. 33.7%), Glasgow Coma Score less than 15 (n=16, 19.3%) and Kernig’s sign (n=11, 13.3%) were the most common signs. The accuracy of ED diagnosis of meningitis was 28.9%. Among the cases which were not meningitis, the most common diagnoses were other infections followed by conditions involving the musculoskeletal and central venous systems. Vomiting (OR 3.33, 1.24-9.09, p=0.021) was the only feature associated with diagnostic accuracy. Conclusion: Meningitis is a great mimicker and can be difficult to diagnose in the ED. Given the lack of clinical features which can be used to differentiate meningitis from other conditions, a high index of suspicion is required so that interventions can be promptly initiated to reduce mortality and morbidity.

Keywords

References

  1. 1. Scheld W, Koedel U, Nathan B et al. Pathophysiology of Bacterial Meningitis: Mechanism(s) of Neuronal Injury. J Infect Dis. 2002;186(s2):S225-33.
  2. 2. WHO Report on Global Surveillance of Epidemic-prone Infectious Diseases. World Health Organization. Website. Available at: https://www.who.int/csr/resources/publications/surveillance/Meningitis.pdf . Accessed 12 April 2019.
  3. 3. Thigpen M, Whitney C, Messonnier N et al. Bacterial Meningitis in the United States, 1998–2007. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(21):2016-25. 4. Levy M, Wong E, Fried D. Diseases That Mimic Meningitis. Clin Pediatr (Phila). 1990;29(5):254-61.
  4. 5. Rømer F. Difficulties in the Diagnosis of Bacterial Meningitis. Lancet. 1977;310(8033):345-7.
  5. 6. Thomas K, Hasbun R, Jekel J et al. The Diagnostic Accuracy of Kernig’s Sign, Brudzinski’s Sign, and Nuchal Rigidity in Adults with Suspected Meningitis. Clin Infect Dis. 2002;35(1):46-52.
  6. 7. Curtis S, Stobart K, Vandermeer B, et al. Clinical Features Suggestive of Meningitis in Children: A Systematic Review of Prospective Data. Pediatrics. 2010;126(5):952-60.
  7. 8. Stovring J, Snyder R. Computed Tomography in Childhood Bacterial Meningitis. J Pediatr. 1980;96(5):820-3.
  8. 9. Akhvlediani T, Shakarishvili R, Tsertsvadze T. The Role of Imaging Studies in CNS Infections. Georgian Med News. 2008;(165):94-8.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Emergency Medicine

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Dennis Clement Forsythe This is me
Singapore

Ling Tiah This is me
Singapore

Publication Date

August 26, 2020

Submission Date

June 15, 2020

Acceptance Date

July 14, 2020

Published in Issue

Year 2020 Volume: 2 Number: 2

APA
Forsythe, D. C., Tiah, L., & Pek, J. H. (2020). DIAGNOSING MENINGITIS AT THE EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT – HOW ACCURATE ARE WE? Eurasian Journal of Critical Care, 2(2), 193-198. https://izlik.org/JA59TE43DN
AMA
1.Forsythe DC, Tiah L, Pek JH. DIAGNOSING MENINGITIS AT THE EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT – HOW ACCURATE ARE WE? Eurasian j Crit Care. 2020;2(2):193-198. https://izlik.org/JA59TE43DN
Chicago
Forsythe, Dennis Clement, Ling Tiah, and Jen Heng Pek. 2020. “DIAGNOSING MENINGITIS AT THE EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT – HOW ACCURATE ARE WE?”. Eurasian Journal of Critical Care 2 (2): 193-98. https://izlik.org/JA59TE43DN.
EndNote
Forsythe DC, Tiah L, Pek JH (August 1, 2020) DIAGNOSING MENINGITIS AT THE EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT – HOW ACCURATE ARE WE? Eurasian Journal of Critical Care 2 2 193–198.
IEEE
[1]D. C. Forsythe, L. Tiah, and J. H. Pek, “DIAGNOSING MENINGITIS AT THE EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT – HOW ACCURATE ARE WE?”, Eurasian j Crit Care, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 193–198, Aug. 2020, [Online]. Available: https://izlik.org/JA59TE43DN
ISNAD
Forsythe, Dennis Clement - Tiah, Ling - Pek, Jen Heng. “DIAGNOSING MENINGITIS AT THE EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT – HOW ACCURATE ARE WE?”. Eurasian Journal of Critical Care 2/2 (August 1, 2020): 193-198. https://izlik.org/JA59TE43DN.
JAMA
1.Forsythe DC, Tiah L, Pek JH. DIAGNOSING MENINGITIS AT THE EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT – HOW ACCURATE ARE WE? Eurasian j Crit Care. 2020;2:193–198.
MLA
Forsythe, Dennis Clement, et al. “DIAGNOSING MENINGITIS AT THE EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT – HOW ACCURATE ARE WE?”. Eurasian Journal of Critical Care, vol. 2, no. 2, Aug. 2020, pp. 193-8, https://izlik.org/JA59TE43DN.
Vancouver
1.Dennis Clement Forsythe, Ling Tiah, Jen Heng Pek. DIAGNOSING MENINGITIS AT THE EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT – HOW ACCURATE ARE WE? Eurasian j Crit Care [Internet]. 2020 Aug. 1;2(2):193-8. Available from: https://izlik.org/JA59TE43DN