BackgroundIn patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), short-term mortality is largely dependent on pneumonia severity, whereas long-term mortality is considered to depend on comorbidity. However, evidence indicates that severity scores used to assist management decisions at disease onset may also be associated with long-term mortality. Therefore, the objective of the study was to investigate the performance of the pneumonia severity scores CURB-65 and CRB-65 compared to the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) for predicting 1-year mortality in adults discharged from hospital after inpatient treatment for CAP.MethodsFrom a single centre, all cases of patients with CAP treated consecutively as inpatients between 2005 and 2009 and surviving at least 30 days after admission were analysed. The patients’ vital status was obtained from the relevant local register office. CURB-65, CRB-65 and CCI were compared using receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis.ResultsOf 498 cases analysed, 106 (21.3%) patients died within 1 year. In univariate analysis, age ≥65 years, nursing home residency, hemiplegia, dementia and congestive heart failure were significantly associated with mortality. CURB-65, CRB-65 and CCI were also all associated with mortality at 1 year. ROC analysis yielded a weak, yet comparable test performance for CURB-65 (AUC and corresponding 95% confidence interval [CI] for risk categories: 0.652 [0.598-0.706]) and CCI (AUC [CI]: 0.631 [0.575-0.688]; for CRB-65 0.621 [0.565-0.677] and 0.590 [0.533-0.646]).ConclusionsNeither CURB-65 or CRB-65 nor CCI allow excellent discrimination in terms of predicting longer term mortality. However, CURB-65 is significantly associated with long-term mortality and performed equally to the CCI in this respect. This fact may help to identify CAP survivors at higher risk after discharge from hospital.

BackgroundFor patients hospitalised due to community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), mortality risk is usually estimated with prognostic scores such as CRB-65 or CURB-65. For elderly patients, a new score referred to as CURSI has been proposed which uses shock index (SI) instead of the blood pressure (B) and age (65) criteria. The new score has not been externally validated to date.MethodsWe used data from a hospital-based CAP registry to compare the ability of CURSI, CURB-65 and CRB-65 to predict mortality at day 30 after hospital admission. Patients were stratified by score points as well as score-point-based risk categories, and mortality for each group was assessed. To compare test performance, receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed, and the areas under the curve (AUROC) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CI).ResultsWe analysed 553 inpatients (45% females, median age 78 years) hospitalised between 2005 and 2009 for CAP. Overall, mortality at day 30 was 11% (59/553). The study sample was characterised by advanced comorbidity (chronic heart failure: 22%, chronic kidney failure: 27%) and functional impairment (nursing home residency: 26%, dementia: 31%). All risk scores were significantly associated with 30-day mortality. The AUROC values with 95% CI using score points for risk prediction were as follows: 0.63 [0.56-0.71] for CRB-65, 0.68 [0.61-0.75] for CURB-65 and 0.68 [0.61-0.75] for CURSI. The CURSI-defined low-risk group (0 or 1 score point) had a higher mortality (8%) than the low-risk groups defined by CURB-65 and CRB-65 (4% and 3%, respectively). Lowering the cut-off for the CURSI-defined low-risk group (0 point only) would lower the mortality to 4%, making it comparable to the CURB-65-defined low-risk group.ConclusionsIn our study, the CURSI-defined low-risk group had a higher 30-day mortality than the low-risk groups defined by CURB-65 and CRB-65. Lowering the cut-off value for the CURSI low-risk group would result in a mortality comparable to the CURB-65-defined low risk group. Even then, however, CURSI does not perform better than the established risk scores.

In comparison with CRB-65 and CURB-65, risk stratification as defined by CURB-age showed the closest association with 30-day mortality in our sample. Further prospective studies are needed to assess the potential of CURB-age for better risk prediction, especially in older patients with CAP.

A network structure can be an alternative to classical cooperation between trauma and geriatric units in one clinic and help reduce possible staffing shortage. Due to the lack of scientific evidence, future evaluations of the geriatric trauma register should reveal whether network structures in geriatric trauma surgery lead to a valid improvement in medical care.

For treatment decisions for the elderly, functional aspects should also be considered in addition to the aspects of risk scores discussed here. In particular, the decision about inpatient admission for elderly, geriatric CAP patients should be made on an individual basis taking the benefit-risk relationship into consideration.