Development and validation of a clinical decision rule for the diagnosis of influenza

Mark H. Ebell, Anna M. Afonso, Ralph Gonzales, John Stein, Blaise Genton, Nicolas Senn

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

13 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Introduction: A clinical decision rule to improve the accuracy of a diagnosis of influenza could help clinicians avoid unnecessary use of diagnostic tests and treatments. Our objective was to develop and validate a simple clinical decision rule for diagnosis of influenza. Methods: We combined data from 2 studies of influenza diagnosis in adult outpatients with suspected influenza: one set in California and one in Switzerland. Patients in both studies underwent a structured history and physical examination and had a reference standard test for influenza (polymerase chain reaction or culture). We randomly divided the dataset into derivation and validation groups and then evaluated simple heuristics and decision rules from previous studies and 3 rules based on our own multivariate analysis. Cutpoints for stratification of risk groups in each model were determined using the derivation group before evaluating them in the validation group. For each decision rule, the positive predictive value and likelihood ratio for influenza in low-, moderate-, and high-risk groups, and the percentage of patients allocated to each risk group, were reported. Results: The simple heuristics (fever and cough; fever, cough, and acute onset) were helpful when positive but not when negative. The most useful and accurate clinical rule assigned 2 points for fever plus cough, 2 points for myalgias, and 1 point each for duration <48 hours and chills or sweats. The risk of influenza was 8% for 0 to 2 points, 30% for 3 points, and 59% for 4 to 6 points; the rule performed similarly in derivation and validation groups. Approximately two-thirds of patients fell into the low- or high-risk group and would not require further diagnostic testing. Conclusion: A simple, valid clinical rule can be used to guide point-of-care testing and empiric therapy for patients with suspected influenza.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)55-62
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of the American Board of Family Medicine
Volume25
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2012

Fingerprint

Human Influenza
Cough
Fever
Chills
Sweat
Myalgia
Switzerland
Routine Diagnostic Tests
Physical Examination
Outpatients
Multivariate Analysis
History
Polymerase Chain Reaction
Therapeutics

Keywords

  • Clinical epidemiology
  • Decision sciences
  • Evidence-based medicine
  • Primary health care
  • Respiratory tract diseases

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Family Practice

Cite this

Development and validation of a clinical decision rule for the diagnosis of influenza. / Ebell, Mark H.; Afonso, Anna M.; Gonzales, Ralph; Stein, John; Genton, Blaise; Senn, Nicolas.

In: Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine, Vol. 25, No. 1, 01.01.2012, p. 55-62.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Ebell, Mark H. ; Afonso, Anna M. ; Gonzales, Ralph ; Stein, John ; Genton, Blaise ; Senn, Nicolas. / Development and validation of a clinical decision rule for the diagnosis of influenza. In: Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine. 2012 ; Vol. 25, No. 1. pp. 55-62.
@article{4e6fa8c3491f41859b14c34308f1d5a5,
title = "Development and validation of a clinical decision rule for the diagnosis of influenza",
abstract = "Introduction: A clinical decision rule to improve the accuracy of a diagnosis of influenza could help clinicians avoid unnecessary use of diagnostic tests and treatments. Our objective was to develop and validate a simple clinical decision rule for diagnosis of influenza. Methods: We combined data from 2 studies of influenza diagnosis in adult outpatients with suspected influenza: one set in California and one in Switzerland. Patients in both studies underwent a structured history and physical examination and had a reference standard test for influenza (polymerase chain reaction or culture). We randomly divided the dataset into derivation and validation groups and then evaluated simple heuristics and decision rules from previous studies and 3 rules based on our own multivariate analysis. Cutpoints for stratification of risk groups in each model were determined using the derivation group before evaluating them in the validation group. For each decision rule, the positive predictive value and likelihood ratio for influenza in low-, moderate-, and high-risk groups, and the percentage of patients allocated to each risk group, were reported. Results: The simple heuristics (fever and cough; fever, cough, and acute onset) were helpful when positive but not when negative. The most useful and accurate clinical rule assigned 2 points for fever plus cough, 2 points for myalgias, and 1 point each for duration <48 hours and chills or sweats. The risk of influenza was 8{\%} for 0 to 2 points, 30{\%} for 3 points, and 59{\%} for 4 to 6 points; the rule performed similarly in derivation and validation groups. Approximately two-thirds of patients fell into the low- or high-risk group and would not require further diagnostic testing. Conclusion: A simple, valid clinical rule can be used to guide point-of-care testing and empiric therapy for patients with suspected influenza.",
keywords = "Clinical epidemiology, Decision sciences, Evidence-based medicine, Primary health care, Respiratory tract diseases",
author = "Ebell, {Mark H.} and Afonso, {Anna M.} and Ralph Gonzales and John Stein and Blaise Genton and Nicolas Senn",
year = "2012",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.3122/jabfm.2012.01.110161",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "25",
pages = "55--62",
journal = "Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine",
issn = "1557-2625",
publisher = "American Board of Family Medicine",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Development and validation of a clinical decision rule for the diagnosis of influenza

AU - Ebell, Mark H.

AU - Afonso, Anna M.

AU - Gonzales, Ralph

AU - Stein, John

AU - Genton, Blaise

AU - Senn, Nicolas

PY - 2012/1/1

Y1 - 2012/1/1

N2 - Introduction: A clinical decision rule to improve the accuracy of a diagnosis of influenza could help clinicians avoid unnecessary use of diagnostic tests and treatments. Our objective was to develop and validate a simple clinical decision rule for diagnosis of influenza. Methods: We combined data from 2 studies of influenza diagnosis in adult outpatients with suspected influenza: one set in California and one in Switzerland. Patients in both studies underwent a structured history and physical examination and had a reference standard test for influenza (polymerase chain reaction or culture). We randomly divided the dataset into derivation and validation groups and then evaluated simple heuristics and decision rules from previous studies and 3 rules based on our own multivariate analysis. Cutpoints for stratification of risk groups in each model were determined using the derivation group before evaluating them in the validation group. For each decision rule, the positive predictive value and likelihood ratio for influenza in low-, moderate-, and high-risk groups, and the percentage of patients allocated to each risk group, were reported. Results: The simple heuristics (fever and cough; fever, cough, and acute onset) were helpful when positive but not when negative. The most useful and accurate clinical rule assigned 2 points for fever plus cough, 2 points for myalgias, and 1 point each for duration <48 hours and chills or sweats. The risk of influenza was 8% for 0 to 2 points, 30% for 3 points, and 59% for 4 to 6 points; the rule performed similarly in derivation and validation groups. Approximately two-thirds of patients fell into the low- or high-risk group and would not require further diagnostic testing. Conclusion: A simple, valid clinical rule can be used to guide point-of-care testing and empiric therapy for patients with suspected influenza.

AB - Introduction: A clinical decision rule to improve the accuracy of a diagnosis of influenza could help clinicians avoid unnecessary use of diagnostic tests and treatments. Our objective was to develop and validate a simple clinical decision rule for diagnosis of influenza. Methods: We combined data from 2 studies of influenza diagnosis in adult outpatients with suspected influenza: one set in California and one in Switzerland. Patients in both studies underwent a structured history and physical examination and had a reference standard test for influenza (polymerase chain reaction or culture). We randomly divided the dataset into derivation and validation groups and then evaluated simple heuristics and decision rules from previous studies and 3 rules based on our own multivariate analysis. Cutpoints for stratification of risk groups in each model were determined using the derivation group before evaluating them in the validation group. For each decision rule, the positive predictive value and likelihood ratio for influenza in low-, moderate-, and high-risk groups, and the percentage of patients allocated to each risk group, were reported. Results: The simple heuristics (fever and cough; fever, cough, and acute onset) were helpful when positive but not when negative. The most useful and accurate clinical rule assigned 2 points for fever plus cough, 2 points for myalgias, and 1 point each for duration <48 hours and chills or sweats. The risk of influenza was 8% for 0 to 2 points, 30% for 3 points, and 59% for 4 to 6 points; the rule performed similarly in derivation and validation groups. Approximately two-thirds of patients fell into the low- or high-risk group and would not require further diagnostic testing. Conclusion: A simple, valid clinical rule can be used to guide point-of-care testing and empiric therapy for patients with suspected influenza.

KW - Clinical epidemiology

KW - Decision sciences

KW - Evidence-based medicine

KW - Primary health care

KW - Respiratory tract diseases

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84855661408&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84855661408&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3122/jabfm.2012.01.110161

DO - 10.3122/jabfm.2012.01.110161

M3 - Article

C2 - 22218625

AN - SCOPUS:84855661408

VL - 25

SP - 55

EP - 62

JO - Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine

JF - Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine

SN - 1557-2625

IS - 1

ER -