We have located links that may give you full text access.
C-reactive protein as an indicator of bacterial infection of adult patients in the emergency department.
Chang Gung Medical Journal 2002 July
BACKGROUND: This investigation evaluates the feasibility of using C-reactive protein (CRP) levels as an indicator of bacterial infection of adult patients in the Emergency Department (ED), by comparing them with clinical signs and routine laboratory tests.
METHODS: One hundred and fifty adult atraumatic patients admitted through the ED of Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital were consecutively enrolled. Seventy-nine patients had documented infection, and 58 had no infection. Body temperature (BT), white blood cell (WBC) count, CRP levels, and the presence of systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) were compared between the infected and uninfected groups.
RESULTS: SIRS was the most sensitive indicator of bacterial infection (sensitivity 84.8%), but it had a 37.9% false-positive rate. BT and WBC count were more specific (at 89.7% and 84.5%) but less sensitive (at 48.1% and 43.0%, respectively). Using Youden's Index, the best cut-off value for CRP was 60 mg/l (sensitivity 67.1%, specificity 94.8%, positive predictive value 94.6%, and negative predictive value 67.9%). The area under the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve was highest for CRP (at 0.88), followed by BT (at 0.77) and WBC (at 0.67) (all p < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: CRP is a better indicator of bacterial infection than either BT or WBC count for adult atraumatic ED patients. A low serum CRP level cannot safely be used to exclude the presence of infection.
METHODS: One hundred and fifty adult atraumatic patients admitted through the ED of Linkou Chang Gung Memorial Hospital were consecutively enrolled. Seventy-nine patients had documented infection, and 58 had no infection. Body temperature (BT), white blood cell (WBC) count, CRP levels, and the presence of systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) were compared between the infected and uninfected groups.
RESULTS: SIRS was the most sensitive indicator of bacterial infection (sensitivity 84.8%), but it had a 37.9% false-positive rate. BT and WBC count were more specific (at 89.7% and 84.5%) but less sensitive (at 48.1% and 43.0%, respectively). Using Youden's Index, the best cut-off value for CRP was 60 mg/l (sensitivity 67.1%, specificity 94.8%, positive predictive value 94.6%, and negative predictive value 67.9%). The area under the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve was highest for CRP (at 0.88), followed by BT (at 0.77) and WBC (at 0.67) (all p < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: CRP is a better indicator of bacterial infection than either BT or WBC count for adult atraumatic ED patients. A low serum CRP level cannot safely be used to exclude the presence of infection.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Prevention and treatment of ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke in people with diabetes mellitus: a focus on glucose control and comorbidities.Diabetologia 2024 April 17
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Clinical Pearls for Primary Care Providers and Gastroenterologists.Mayo Clinic Proceedings 2024 April
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app