Renal impairment after spontaneous bacterial peritonitis: incidence and prognosis.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) is an important complication in cirrhotic patients. The aim of the present study was to assess the incidence, predictive factors and prognosis for renal impairment (RI) after SBP in cirrhotic patients from southern Brazil. METHODS: Of the 1030 hospitalizations evaluated, 114 episodes of SBP were diagnosed in 94 patients (mean age 49 years; 76.59% men). SBP diagnosis was established when the ascitic fluid polymorphonuclear cell count was equal to or greater than 250 cells/mm3. Five cases were excluded. The variables assessed as possible predictors of steady or progressive RI were blood urea nitrogen and creatinine levels before the diagnosis of SBP; type of infection, antibiotic prophylaxis, first episode or recurrent SBP, presence of gastrointestinal bleeding and hepatic encephalopathy during hospitalization, SBP resolution, Child-Pugh classification, levels of blood pressure, ascitic fluid and blood polymorphonuclear cell count, bacteriological data (positive and negative ascitic fluid culture), albumin, bilirubin, sodium and prothrombin time at the moment of diagnosis. RESULTS: The incidence of SBP was 11.07%. In 61 (55.96%) episodes, SBP was associated with RI (transient in 57.37%; steady in 19.67%; and progressive in 22.95%). The mortality rate associated with progressive RI was 100%; 58.33% with steady RI; and 2.85% with transient RI. The mortality rate in patients with or without RI was 36.07% and 6.25%, respectively (P<0.001). The level of creatinine (greater than or equal to 1.3mg/dL) before the diagnosis of SBP and the rate of infection resolution were the only predictors of RI in the multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: RI after SBP is a common complication, and indicates a poor prognosis for this infection. High levels of creatinine before infection and the rate of infection resolution are independent predictors of RI.     

Documenting asthma severity: do we get it right?

BACKGROUND: The 1997 National Asthma Education and Prevention Program (NAEPP) recommends a severity classification scheme to optimize the use of anti-inflammatory therapy for persistent asthma. Physician documentation of asthma severity is often used as a quality assurance measure. OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that physician documentation of asthma severity is associated with appropriate use of anti-inflammatory therapy. DESIGN/METHODS: Setting: inner-city academic health center. First, we reviewed a consecutive sample of charts of scheduled pediatric patients. Then, we administered a structured parent survey regarding the child's asthma symptoms and current asthma therapy. We used NAEPP guidelines to classify patients' severity of asthma. The main outcome measure was appropriate use of anti-inflammatory therapy. Appropriate therapy was defined as: (1) mild persistent asthmatics using anti-inflammatory therapy, and (2) moderate-severe persistent asthmatics using inhaled steroids. Chart classification of asthma severity was compared with the NAEPP-applied classification. RESULTS: Of 784 charts, 214 (27%) were asthmatic. Of these, 176 (82%) were surveyed. The mean age was 7.4 years; 61% were males. Severity classification was documented in 77% of charts. Chart documentation differed significantly from survey classification for the same patients: (mild intermittent 54% vs. 40%, mild persistent 21% vs. 14%, moderate persistent 24% vs. 36%, severe persistent 1% vs. 10%; all p < .001). Correctly classified patients were more likely to be on appropriate therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians underestimated the severity classification of asthmatic patients. Incorrect classification was associated with inappropriate asthma therapy. These findings have implications for the institution of asthma quality improvement programs.     

Outcomes of low-vision services using optometric and multidisciplinary approaches: a non-randomized comparison

Consecutive patients (n = 215) who were referred to optometric (55%) or multidisciplinary (45%) low-vision services and above 50 years of age were recruited from four hospitals in the Netherlands. They completed two vision-related quality of life questionnaires, the Vision Quality of Life Core Measure (VCM1) and the Low Vision Quality of Life Questionnaire (LVQOL), before their first visit with low-vision services and 1 year later. At follow-up, patients referred to multidisciplinary low-vision services had lower scores on the mobility subscale of the LVQOL than patients referred to optometric low-vision services [5.3 points; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.2-10.5]. Paired sample t-tests for the two groups of patients taken together show improvement for the VCM1 (3.1 points; 95% CI: 0.6-5.6) and deterioration for the basic aspects of vision (3.5 points; 95% CI: 1.1-5.9) and the mobility (6.6 points; 95% CI: 3.7-9.5) subscales of the LVQOL. In conclusion, people referred to optometric services showed less deterioration in mobility than those referred to multidisciplinary services. No differences were observed for any of the other subscales of the LVQOL and the VCM1. Future research in this field should include randomized controlled designs comparing low-vision services with no treatment or placebo.