A prospective hospital study of the aetiology of community‐acquired pneumonia

Lim, Irene; Shaw, David R.; Stanley, Dennis P.; Lumb, Richard; McLennan, Geoffrey

doi:10.5694/j.1326-5377.1989.tb101168.x

Cited by 87 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other UK studies have reported mortalities of 8%,35 [II] 12%36 [Ib] and 14% 37 . [Ib] Countries with similar healthcare systems have reported hospital mortality rates of 4%,24 [Ib] 7%,38 [II] 8%241 [Ib] and 10% 39 . [Ib] …”

Section: Section 2 Incidence Mortality and Economic Consequencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

BTS guidelines for the management of community acquired pneumonia in adults: update 2009

Lim

Baudouin²,

George³

et al. 2009

Thorax

1,178

1,073

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Section 2 Incidence Mortality and Economic Consequencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

BTS guidelines for the management of community acquired pneumonia in adults: update 2009

Lim

Baudouin²,

George³

et al. 2009

Thorax

1,178

1,073

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The overall mortality was 10%. Over 40% of patients were diagnosed with pneumococcal pneumonia, and, collectively, viruses were the second most common aetiology 5 . The causes of CAP were also examined in 200 admitted cases in Cairns, North Queensland, by Thompson 6 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Severe community‐acquired pneumonia: an Australian perspective

Wilson

Ferguson

2005

Internal Medicine Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Severe CAP requiring ICU admission was associated with a mortality rate of 32%, despite appropriate antimicrobial therapy including a beta-lactam and a macrolide antibiotic in most cases. Causative organisms identified were similar to those found in previous studies. High rates of viral causes (28% of identified pathogens) were noted. Low rates of legionellosis and other atypical causes were found, most probably due to a lack of systematic testing for these agents.

show abstract

“…The study periods of these seven studies are shown in Box 2. Participants in three studies 16 , 20 , 22 were predominantly Indigenous; in the other four studies, participants were either reported 15 or assumed 18 , 19 , 24 to be predominantly non‐Indigenous.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%