Cargando…
The good and the bad: using C reactive protein to distinguish bacterial from non-bacterial infection among febrile patients in low-resource settings
C reactive protein (CRP), a marker for the presence of an inflammatory process, is the most extensively studied marker for distinguishing bacterial from non-bacterial infections in febrile patients. A point-of-care test for bacterial infections would be of particular use in low-resource settings whe...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7259834/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32467355 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2020-002396 |
_version_ | 1783540212035485696 |
---|---|
author | Escadafal, Camille Incardona, Sandra Fernandez-Carballo, B Leticia Dittrich, Sabine |
author_facet | Escadafal, Camille Incardona, Sandra Fernandez-Carballo, B Leticia Dittrich, Sabine |
author_sort | Escadafal, Camille |
collection | PubMed |
description | C reactive protein (CRP), a marker for the presence of an inflammatory process, is the most extensively studied marker for distinguishing bacterial from non-bacterial infections in febrile patients. A point-of-care test for bacterial infections would be of particular use in low-resource settings where other laboratory diagnostics are not always available, antimicrobial resistance rates are high and bacterial infections such as pneumonia are a leading cause of death. This document summarises evidence on CRP testing for bacterial infections in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). With a push for universal health coverage and prevention of antimicrobial resistance, it is important to understand if CRP might be able to do the job. The use of CRP polarised the global health community and the aim of this document is to summarise the ‘good and the bad’ of CRP in multiple settings in LMICs. In brief, the literature that was reviewed suggests that CRP testing may be beneficial in low-resource settings to improve rational antibiotic use for febrile patients, but the positive predictive value is insufficient to allow it to be used alone as a single tool. CRP testing may be best used as part of a panel of diagnostic tests and algorithms. Further studies in low-resource settings, particularly with regard to impact on antibiotic prescribing and cost-effectiveness of CRP testing, are warranted. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7259834 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-72598342020-06-09 The good and the bad: using C reactive protein to distinguish bacterial from non-bacterial infection among febrile patients in low-resource settings Escadafal, Camille Incardona, Sandra Fernandez-Carballo, B Leticia Dittrich, Sabine BMJ Glob Health Analysis C reactive protein (CRP), a marker for the presence of an inflammatory process, is the most extensively studied marker for distinguishing bacterial from non-bacterial infections in febrile patients. A point-of-care test for bacterial infections would be of particular use in low-resource settings where other laboratory diagnostics are not always available, antimicrobial resistance rates are high and bacterial infections such as pneumonia are a leading cause of death. This document summarises evidence on CRP testing for bacterial infections in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). With a push for universal health coverage and prevention of antimicrobial resistance, it is important to understand if CRP might be able to do the job. The use of CRP polarised the global health community and the aim of this document is to summarise the ‘good and the bad’ of CRP in multiple settings in LMICs. In brief, the literature that was reviewed suggests that CRP testing may be beneficial in low-resource settings to improve rational antibiotic use for febrile patients, but the positive predictive value is insufficient to allow it to be used alone as a single tool. CRP testing may be best used as part of a panel of diagnostic tests and algorithms. Further studies in low-resource settings, particularly with regard to impact on antibiotic prescribing and cost-effectiveness of CRP testing, are warranted. BMJ Publishing Group 2020-05-27 /pmc/articles/PMC7259834/ /pubmed/32467355 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2020-002396 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Analysis Escadafal, Camille Incardona, Sandra Fernandez-Carballo, B Leticia Dittrich, Sabine The good and the bad: using C reactive protein to distinguish bacterial from non-bacterial infection among febrile patients in low-resource settings |
title | The good and the bad: using C reactive protein to distinguish bacterial from non-bacterial infection among febrile patients in low-resource settings |
title_full | The good and the bad: using C reactive protein to distinguish bacterial from non-bacterial infection among febrile patients in low-resource settings |
title_fullStr | The good and the bad: using C reactive protein to distinguish bacterial from non-bacterial infection among febrile patients in low-resource settings |
title_full_unstemmed | The good and the bad: using C reactive protein to distinguish bacterial from non-bacterial infection among febrile patients in low-resource settings |
title_short | The good and the bad: using C reactive protein to distinguish bacterial from non-bacterial infection among febrile patients in low-resource settings |
title_sort | good and the bad: using c reactive protein to distinguish bacterial from non-bacterial infection among febrile patients in low-resource settings |
topic | Analysis |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7259834/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32467355 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2020-002396 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT escadafalcamille thegoodandthebadusingcreactiveproteintodistinguishbacterialfromnonbacterialinfectionamongfebrilepatientsinlowresourcesettings AT incardonasandra thegoodandthebadusingcreactiveproteintodistinguishbacterialfromnonbacterialinfectionamongfebrilepatientsinlowresourcesettings AT fernandezcarballobleticia thegoodandthebadusingcreactiveproteintodistinguishbacterialfromnonbacterialinfectionamongfebrilepatientsinlowresourcesettings AT dittrichsabine thegoodandthebadusingcreactiveproteintodistinguishbacterialfromnonbacterialinfectionamongfebrilepatientsinlowresourcesettings AT escadafalcamille goodandthebadusingcreactiveproteintodistinguishbacterialfromnonbacterialinfectionamongfebrilepatientsinlowresourcesettings AT incardonasandra goodandthebadusingcreactiveproteintodistinguishbacterialfromnonbacterialinfectionamongfebrilepatientsinlowresourcesettings AT fernandezcarballobleticia goodandthebadusingcreactiveproteintodistinguishbacterialfromnonbacterialinfectionamongfebrilepatientsinlowresourcesettings AT dittrichsabine goodandthebadusingcreactiveproteintodistinguishbacterialfromnonbacterialinfectionamongfebrilepatientsinlowresourcesettings |