Objective To determine the efficacy of a 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine in people at high risk of pneumococcal pneumonia.Design Prospective, randomised, placebo controlled double blind study.Setting Nursing homes in Japan.Participants 1006 nursing home residents.Interventions Participants were randomly allocated to either 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (n=502) or placebo (n=504).Main outcome measures The primary end points were the incidence of all cause pneumonia and pneumococcal pneumonia. Secondary end points were deaths from pneumococcal pneumonia, all cause pneumonia, and other causes.Results Pneumonia occurred in 63 (12.5%) participants in the vaccine group and 104 (20.6%) in the placebo group. Pneumococcal pneumonia was diagnosed in 14 (2.8%) participants in the vaccine group and 37 (7.3%) in the placebo group (P<0.001). All cause pneumonia and pneumococcal pneumonia were significantly more frequent in the placebo group than in the vaccine group: incidence per 1000 person years 55 v 91 (P<0.0006) and 12 v 32 (P<0.001), respectively. Death from pneumococcal pneumonia was significantly higher in the placebo group than in the vaccine group (35.1% (13/37) v 0% (0/14), P<0.01). The death rate from all cause pneumonia (vaccine group 20.6% (13/63) v placebo group 25.0% (26/104), P=0.5) and from other causes (vaccine group 17.7% (89/502) v placebo group (80/504) 15.9%, P=0.4) did not differ between the two study groups.Conclusion The 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine prevented pneumococcal pneumonia and reduced mortality from pneumococcal pneumonia in nursing home residents.Trial registration Japan Medical Association Center for Clinical Trials JMA-IIA00024.
BACKGROUND: Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) guidelines have improved the treatment and outcomes of patients with CAP, primarily by standardization of initial empirical therapy. But current society-published guidelines exclude immunocompromised patients. RESEARCH QUESTION: There is no consensus regarding the initial treatment of immunocompromised patients with suspected CAP. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This consensus document was created by a multidisciplinary panel of 45 physicians with experience in the treatment of CAP in immunocompromised patients. The Delphi survey methodology was used to reach consensus. RESULTS: The panel focused on 21 questions addressing initial management strategies. The panel achieved consensus in defining the population, site of care, likely pathogens, microbiologic workup, general principles of empirical therapy, and empirical therapy for specific pathogens. INTERPRETATION: This document offers general suggestions for the initial treatment of the immunocompromised patient who arrives at the hospital with pneumonia.
There are no prospective comparison of the etiology and clinical outcome between hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) and nursing home-acquired pneumonia (NHAP) in non-intubated elderly. This study prospectively evaluated the etiology of HAP and NHAP in non-intubated elderly. A prospective cohort study was carried out in a rural region of Japan where the population over 65 years of age represents 30% of the population. A total of 108 patients were enrolled. There were 33 patients with HAP and 75 with NHAP. Etiologic diagnosis was established in 78.8% of HAP and in 72% of NHAP patients. The most frequent pathogens were Chlamydophila pneumoniae followed by Streptococcus pneumoniae, Staphylococcus aureus and Influenza virus. The frequency of Streptococcus pneumoniae and Influenza virus was significantly higher, whereas the frequency of Staphylococcus aureus and Enterobacteriaceae was significantly lower in NHAP compared to HAP. Performance and nutritional status were significantly worse in patients with HAP than in those with NHAP. Hospital mortality was significantly lower in patients with NHAP compared to those with HAP. This study demonstrated that C. pneumoniae, Streptococcus pneumoniae, Staphylococcus aureus and Influenza virus are frequent causative agents of pneumonia in non-intubated elderly and that the responsible pathogens and clinical outcome differ between NHAP and HAP.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.