Araştırma Makalesi

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

Cilt: 2 Sayı: 2 26 Ağustos 2020
PDF İndir
EN

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

Öz

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.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Kaynakça

  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.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil

İngilizce

Konular

Acil Tıp

Bölüm

Araştırma Makalesi

Yazarlar

Dennis Clement Forsythe Bu kişi benim
Singapore

Ling Tiah Bu kişi benim
Singapore

Yayımlanma Tarihi

26 Ağustos 2020

Gönderilme Tarihi

15 Haziran 2020

Kabul Tarihi

14 Temmuz 2020

Yayımlandığı Sayı

Yıl 2020 Cilt: 2 Sayı: 2

Kaynak Göster

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 Journal of Critical Care. 2020;2(2):193-198. https://izlik.org/JA59TE43DN
Chicago
Forsythe, Dennis Clement, Ling Tiah, ve 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 (01 Ağustos 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, ve J. H. Pek, “DIAGNOSING MENINGITIS AT THE EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT – HOW ACCURATE ARE WE?”, Eurasian Journal of Critical Care, c. 2, sy 2, ss. 193–198, Ağu. 2020, [çevrimiçi]. Erişim adresi: 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 (01 Ağustos 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 Journal of Critical Care. 2020;2:193–198.
MLA
Forsythe, Dennis Clement, vd. “DIAGNOSING MENINGITIS AT THE EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT – HOW ACCURATE ARE WE?”. Eurasian Journal of Critical Care, c. 2, sy 2, Ağustos 2020, ss. 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 Journal of Critical Care [Internet]. 01 Ağustos 2020;2(2):193-8. Erişim adresi: https://izlik.org/JA59TE43DN