Talk:Pneumonia severity index

Medicine Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

CURB-65

Would help to compare these two, as they are supposed to be similar effectiveness, where the curb-65 is a lot easier to calculate on the fly.152.133.7.130 (talk) 20:53, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Discrepancy with Fine, et al

This article cites the Fine, et al paper, which, from what I can tell, is the definitive source for the PSI. However, the scores for Step 2 of the assessment are not the same as given in the paper. Are these updated scores? Can someone tell me what's up? Mlbish (talk) 20:33, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First Paragraph (introduction and definition)

Many medical trainees use Wiki as a reference source, so it is important to anticipate and address their needs in medicine-related articles, especially if doing so also adds to the relevance and important content of the article for readers in general.

In reference to the PORT score, medical trainees often, but mistakenly, use the PORT score to determine the need for hospitalization of people with pneumonia. Hence, that error should be "corrected" by an explicit statement to the effect that the PORT score predicts mortality but does not serve to determine which patients should be hospitalized. Not only does such a statement anticipate the needs of medical trainees, it may also be of great relevance to the lay reader. Such an individual may calculate the PORT score for themselves, or for an afflicted relative, and might wonder why, despite the score being high (or low) they were hospitalized (or not).

Please do not cut out the sentence simply because it doesn't coincide with your vision of what the structure of this article should look like.

Thank you.

Addendum My credentials: Board certified, and Royal College of Physicians of Canada certified, specialist in Internal Medicine; 25 years post-fellowship experience; "hospitalist" at major teaching hospital for over 20 years. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaussgauss (talk • contribs) 01:28, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The effects of incorporating a pneumonia severity index into the admission protocol for community-acquired pneumonia. Jo S, Kim K, Jung K, Rhee JE, Cho IS, Lee CC, Singer AJ. J Emerg Med. 2010 Jun 11

The above article describes that, in contrary to what has been said on the Wiki page, that PSI is a good measure in either hospitalizing a patient or not. It is however not developed for this purpose. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.10.121.20 (talk) 18:55, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Update, 2017: The abstract of the main report from the study that created the score (Fine et al 1997, PMID 8995086) states, "This prediction rule may help physicians make more rational decisions about hospitalization for patients with pneumonia." So it is not clear what the basis is for the claims above. Here are the current statements now in the article, with reference citations: The PSI/PORT score is often used to predict the need for hospitalization in people with pneumonia.^[1] This is consistent with the conclusions stated in the original report that published the PSI/PORT score:^[2] "The prediction rule we describe accurately identifies the patients with community-acquired pneumonia who are at low risk for death and other adverse outcomes. This prediction rule may help physicians make more rational decisions about hospitalization for patients with pneumonia."^[2] Lise-lyse (talk) 01:28, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Mark Williams; Scott A. Flanders; Winthrop F. Whitcomb (28 September 2007). Comprehensive hospital medicine: an evidence based approach. Elsevier Health Sciences. pp. 273–. ISBN 978-1-4160-0223-9. Retrieved 11 November 2010.
^ ^a ^b Fine, MJ; Auble, TE; Yealy, DM; Hanusa, BH; Weissfeld, LA; Singer, DE; Coley, CM; Marrie, TJ; Kapoor, WN; et al. (Jan 1997). "A prediction rule to identify low-risk patients with community-acquired pneumonia". N Engl J Med. 336 (4): 243–250. doi:10.1056/NEJM199701233360402. PMID 8995086.

[WilliamsFlanders2007-1] Mark Williams; Scott A. Flanders; Winthrop F. Whitcomb (28 September 2007). Comprehensive hospital medicine: an evidence based approach. Elsevier Health Sciences. pp. 273–. ISBN 978-1-4160-0223-9. Retrieved 11 November 2010.

[pmid8995086-2] Fine, MJ; Auble, TE; Yealy, DM; Hanusa, BH; Weissfeld, LA; Singer, DE; Coley, CM; Marrie, TJ; Kapoor, WN; et al. (Jan 1997). "A prediction rule to identify low-risk patients with community-acquired pneumonia". N Engl J Med. 336 (4): 243–250. doi:10.1056/NEJM199701233360402. PMID 8995086.

[1]

[2]