论文部分内容阅读
目的:探讨急诊医疗保健相关性肺炎（healthcare-associated pneumonia, HCAP）与社区获得性肺炎（community-acquired pneumonia，CAP）的差别，分析HCAP在我国急诊科是否为一个相对独立的肺炎类型。方法:回顾性分析首都医科大学附属北京天坛医院、首都医科大学附属北京朝阳医院和北京积水潭医院回龙观院区2018年9月至2019年5月入住急诊的HCAP及CAP患者的临床资料，采集患者一般资料、基础疾病种类、入院24 h内实验室检查、病原学检查结果、经验性抗感染治疗方案、是否机械通气、临床转归等。应用肺炎严重指数（pneumonia severity index, PSI）对肺炎严重程度进行评估。计量资料采用均数±标准差表示，两组间比较采用n t检验，计数资料比较采用n χ2检验，以n P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。n 结果:纳入HCAP和CAP患者各105例。HCAP组合并两种以上基础疾病例数较多，外周血白细胞计数、血红蛋白水平异常人数及血乳酸水平两组间差异有统计学意义（均n P<0.05）；HCAP组PSI评分为（134.0±26.3）分，高于CAP组（113.0±16.4）分，Ⅳ级少于CAP组，Ⅴ级多于CAP组，差异有统计学意义（均n P<0.05）。HCAP组分离多耐药菌株73株（69.52%），CAP组55株（52.38%）；HCAP组鲍曼不动杆菌多于CAP组，CAP组肺炎链球菌、肺炎克雷伯杆菌、大肠埃希菌多于HCAP组；HCAP组铜绿假单胞菌对亚胺培南耐药率为22.2%，高于CAP组的10.0%，鲍曼不动杆菌对头孢哌酮/舒巴坦耐药率为27.3%，低于CAP组的54.5%，其对美罗培南耐药率为45.5%，低于CAP组的72.7%；HCAP组初始经验性抗感染治疗应用碳青霉烯比例为21.00%，高于CAP组的10.48%，差异均有统计学意义（均n P<0.05）。HCAP组有创机械通气比例（21.00%），高于CAP组（7.62%），HCAP组病死率（21.00%），高于CAP组（8.57%），均n P<0.05。n 结论:急诊HCAP患者合并多种基础疾病；病原菌耐药率高，初始经验性抗感染治疗需要更高级的药物；机械通气比例和病死率高。在我国急诊HCAP是一个相对独立的肺炎类型。“,”Objective:To explore the differences between emergency healthcare-associated pneumonia (HCAP) and community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), to analyze whether HCAP is a relatively independent type pneumonia in the emergency department in China.Methods:Clinical data of HCAP and CAP patients admitted to the emergency department of Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital of Capital Medical University and Huilongguan Hospital from September 2018 to May 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. General information of the patients, types of basic diseases, laboratory examination within 24 h of admission, etiological examination results, empirical anti-infection treatment plan, mechanical ventilation and clinical outcome were collected. The pneumonia severity index (PSI) was used to assess the pneumonia severity. The measurement data were expressed as mean ± standard deviation for n t test, and the counting data were performed by χ n 2 test. A n P<0.05 indicated statistical difference.n Results:One hundred and five HCAP patients and 105 CAP patients were collected. The number of HCAP combined with two or more basic diseases was higher than that of the CAP group. There were statistically significant differences between the two groups in white blood cell count, mean hemoglobin and blood lactic acid level.The PSI score of the HCAP group was higher than that of the CAP group (134.0±26.3 n vs 113.0±16.34). The PSI score grade IV of the HCAP group was lower than that of the CAP group, while the PSI score grade V of the HCAP group was higher than that of the CAP group, with statistically significant differences (n P<0.05). In the HCAP group, 73 strains (69.52%) and 55 strains (52.38%) of multi-drug resistant strains were isolated. n Acinetobacter baumannii and n Streptococcus pneumoniae, n Klebsiella pneumoniae and n Escherichia coli in the HCAP group were more than those in the CAP group. The drug resistance rate of pseudomonas aeruginosa to imipenem in the HCAP group was higher than that in the CAP group (22.2% n vs 10.0%); the drug resistance rate of n Acinetobacter baumannii to cefoperazone/sulbactam was lower than that in the CAP group (27.3% n vs 54.5%); the drug resistance rate of n Pseudomonas aeruginosa to Meropenem was lower than that in the CAP group (45.5% n vs 72.7%). The proportion of carbapenems in the initial empirical anti-infection treatment in the HCAP group was higher than that in the CAP group (21.00% n vs 10.48%), and the difference was statistically significant. The ratio of invasive mechanical ventilation and the fatality rate in the HCAP group were higher than those in the CAP group (21.00% n vs 7.62%, 21.00% n vs 8.57%; both n P<0.05).n Conclusions:HCAP patients in emergency department are complicated with a variety of basic diseases, high drug resistance rate of pathogenic bacteria, and more advanced drugs are required for initial empirical anti-infection treatment, high proportion of mechanical ventilation, and high fatality rate. HCAP is a relatively independent category of pneumonia in emergency in China.