Evaluation of WHO criteria for identifying patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome out of hospital: prospective observational study

Objectives To determine the clinical and radiological features of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and to evaluate the accuracy of the World Health Organization's guidelines on defining cases of SARS. Design Prospective observational study. Setting A newly set up SARS screening clinic i...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inBMJ Vol. 326; no. 7403; pp. 1354 - 1358
Main Authors Rainer, Timothy H, Cameron, Peter A, Smit, DeVilliers, Ong, Kim L, Hung, Alex Ng Wing, Nin, David Chan Po, Ahuja, Anil T, Si, Louis Chan Yik, Sung, Joseph J Y
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published London British Medical Journal Publishing Group 21.06.2003
British Medical Association
BMJ Publishing Group LTD
BMJ Publishing Group
BMJ Publishing Group Ltd
EditionInternational edition
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Objectives To determine the clinical and radiological features of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and to evaluate the accuracy of the World Health Organization's guidelines on defining cases of SARS. Design Prospective observational study. Setting A newly set up SARS screening clinic in the emergency department of a university hospital in Hong Kong's New Territories. Participants 556 hospital staff, patients, and relatives who attended the screening clinic and who had had contact with someone with SARS. Main outcome measure Number of confirmed cases of SARS. Results Of the 556 people, 141 were admitted to hospital, and 97 had confirmed SARS. Fever, chills, malaise, myalgia, rigor, loss of appetite, vomiting, diarrhoea, and neck pain but not respiratory tract symptoms were significantly more common among the 97 patients than among the other patients. The overall accuracy of the WHO guidelines for identifying suspected SARS was 83% and their negative predictive value was 86% (95% confidence interval 83% to 89%). They had a sensitivity of 26% (17% to 36%) and a specificity of 96% (93% to 97%). Conclusions Current WHO guidelines for diagnosing suspected SARS may not be sufficiently sensitive in assessing patients before admission to hospital. Daily follow up, evaluation of non-respiratory, systemic symptoms, and chest radiography would be better screening tools.
Bibliography:Correspondence to: T H Rainer, Department of Emergency Medicine, Prince of Wales Hospital, Shatin, New Territories, Hong Kong, China
href:bmj-326-1354.pdf
istex:9EC94BA6E9B964E80B5472308C56F711BDE793D3
PMID:12816820
local:bmj;326/7403/1354
ark:/67375/NVC-FCHHZKXW-P
ArticleID:bmj.326.7403.1354
ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ObjectType-Article-2
ObjectType-Undefined-1
ObjectType-Feature-3
Correspondence to: T H Rainer, Department of Emergency Medicine, Prince of Wales Hospital, Shatin, New Territories, Hong Kong, China rainer1091@cuhk.edu.hk
Contributors: THR had the idea for the study, oversaw its planning and execution and the statistical analysis, and prepared the manuscript. PAC, DS, and KLO participated in the planning, execution, and analysis. ANWH, DCPN, and ATA were responsible for assessment of radiographs and scans. LCYS planned the epidemiological follow up. JJYS supervised the clinical assessment of patients after admission. All authors contributed to the final version of the paper. THR will act as guarantor.
Details of health advice given to attenders at the screening clinic are on bmj.com
Funding: No additional funding.
Competing interests: None declared.
ISSN:0959-8138
0959-8146
1468-5833
1756-1833
DOI:10.1136/bmj.326.7403.1354