MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1086/426080

Медицинская библиотека · Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2004

Screening for inhalational anthrax due to bioterrorism: evaluating proposed screening protocols.

Howell John M, Mayer Thom A, Hanfling Dan, Morrison Allan, Druckenbrod Glenn, Murphy Cecele, Cates Robert, Pauze Denis

СтатьяПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

Eleven known cases of bioterrorism-related inhalational anthrax (IA) were treated in the United States during 2001. We retrospectively compared 2 methods that have been proposed to screen for IA. The 2 screening protocols for IA were applied to the emergency department charts of patients who presented with possible signs or symptoms of IA at Inova Fairfax Hospital (Falls Church, Virginia) from 20 October 2001 through 3 November 2001. The Mayer criteria would have screened 4 patients (0.4%; 95% CI, 0.1%-0.9%) and generated charges of 1900 dollars. If 29 patients (2.6%; 95% CI, 1.7%-3.7%) with >or=5 symptoms (but without fever and tachycardia) were screened, charges were 13,325 dollars. The Hupert criteria would have screened 273 patients (24%; 95% CI, 22%-27%) and generated charges of 126,025 dollars. In this outbreak of bioterrorism-related IA, applying the Mayer criteria would have identified both patients with IA and would have generated fewer charges than applying the Hupert criteria.

Для цитирования: Howell John M, Mayer Thom A, Hanfling Dan, Morrison Allan, Druckenbrod Glenn, Murphy Cecele, Cates Robert, Pauze Denis. Screening for inhalational anthrax due to bioterrorism: evaluating proposed screening protocols.. Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America. 2004. DOI: 10.1086/426080.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.