Objective The Japan Respiratory Society documented a new category of guidelines for nursing and healthcare-associated pneumonia (NHCAP), which is distinct from community acquired pneumonia (CAP). The objective of this study was to determine the epidemiological differences between NHCAP patients in a teaching university hospital and a community hospital. In addition, to clarify the strategy for treatment of NHCAP, we investigated the role of atypical pathogens. Methods We analyzed 250 NHCAP and 421 CAP cases in a university hospital and 349 NHCAP and 374 CAP cases in a community hospital. Results Patient age and the incidences of poor general condition were significantly higher in the community hospital compared with those in the university hospital. The distribution and frequency of pathogens, especially multidrug-resistant (MDR) pathogens, were significantly different between the two hospitals. Central nervous system disorders, dementia and poor performance status, which was possibility related to aspiration pneumonia, were significantly more frequent in patients with NHCAP compared with those with CAP in both hospitals. Atypical pathogens were detected in a few cases in patients with NHCAP. Conclusion There were many differences in the clinical characteristics between NHCAP patients in a university hospital and a community hospital even for hospitals located in the same area. Aspiration pneumonia was thought to be the main characteristic of NHCAP in both hospitals. Thus, all NHCAP patients did not need the same empiric therapy with a multidrug regimen directed against MDR pathogens. In addition, physicians rarely need to consider atypical pathogens in NHCAP treatment.

BackgroundAlthough the prevalence of macrolide-resistant Mycoplasma pneumoniae isolates in Japanese pediatric patients has increased rapidly, there have been no reports concerning macrolide-resistant M. pneumoniae infection in adolescents aged 16 to 19 years old. The purpose of this study was to clarify the prevalence and clinical characteristics of macrolide-resistant M. pneumoniae in adolescent patients with community-acquired pneumonia.MethodsA total of 99 cases with M. pneumoniae pneumonia confirmed by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and culture were analyzed. Forty-five cases were pediatric patients less than 16 years old, 26 cases were 16 to 19-year-old adolescent patients and 28 cases were adult patients. Primers for domain V of 23S rRNA were used and DNA sequences of the PCR products were compared with the sequence of an M. pneumoniae reference strain.ResultsThirty of 45 pediatric patients (66%), 12 of 26 adolescent patients (46%) and seven of 28 adult patients (25%) with M. pneumoniae pneumonia were found to be infected with macrolide-resistant M. pneumoniae (MR patients). Although the prevalence of resistant strains was similar in pediatric patients between 2008 and 2011, an increase in the prevalence of resistant strains was observed in adolescent patients. Among 30 pediatric MR patients, 26 had an A-to-G transition at position 2063 (A2063G) and four had an A-to-G transition at position 2064 (A2064G). In 12 adolescent MR patients, 10 showed an A2063G transition and two showed an A2064G transition, and in seven adult MR patients, six showed an A2063G transition and one showed an A2064G transition.ConclusionsThe prevalence of macrolide-resistant M. pneumoniae is high among adolescent patients as well as pediatric patients less than 16-years old. To prevent outbreaks of M. pneumoniae infection, especially macrolide-resistant M. pneumoniae, in closed populations including among families, in schools and in university students, physicians should pay close attention to macrolide-resistant M. pneumoniae.

BackgroundSeveral symptoms are classically thought to be suggestive of pertussis in children, but the diagnostic value of these symptoms in adolescent and adult patients is unclear. We evaluated the accuracy of the clinical findings for the early presumptive diagnosis of pertussis in adolescent and adult patients. Furthermore, we measured fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) with regard to whether we could distinguish eosinophilic inflammation of the airway and pertussis. FeNO is not expected to be associated with pertussis.MethodsWe compared 183 cases with laboratory-confirmed pertussis using serology and polymerase chain reaction and 1,132 cases without laboratory-confirmed pertussis.ResultsAmong pertussis patients, paroxysmal cough was common with 90% sensitivity, but the specificity was low (25%). Posttussive vomiting and whoop were less common (sensitivity 25% and 19%, respectively), but both showed greater specificity for pertussis (80% and 86%, respectively). Posttussive gagging was observed with intermediate frequency and provided greater specificity (49% and 77%, respectively). Pertussis cases were most frequent between May and August with a peak in June. The mean FeNO value for the pertussis patients was 18.2 ± 9.2 ppb, which was significantly lower than that in asthma patients (56.9 ± 20.3 ppb, p <0.001). The most useful definition was posttussive vomiting and/or gagging, and a plus normal FeNO value, which had a sensitivity of 72% and a specificity of 70%.ConclusionsClinical symptoms and laboratory data are of limited value in making the diagnosis of pertussis, and it was clinically difficult to differentiate adolescent and adult patients with or without pertussis. However, pertussis should be considered if patients have posttussive vomiting and/or gagging and a normal FeNO concentration.

These results indicate that it is difficult to distinguish between atypical pneumonia and bacterial pneumonia in the elderly using the JRS scoring system. When treating patients aged ≥60 years, physicians should use fluoroquinolones or β-lactam antibiotics + macrolides as empirical first-choice drugs so as to always provide antibiotic protection against potential atypical pathogens.

No abstract