EPOS2012 has better specificity compared to IDSA2012 for diagnosing acute bacterial rhinosinusitis
Volume: 56 - Issue: 3
First page: 241 - Last page: 244
K. Seresirikachorn - K. Snidvongs - W. Chitsuthipakorn - W. Ruksakul - S. Chusakul - J. Kanjanaumporn - S. Aeumjaturapat
BACKGROUND: Acute bacterial rhinosinusitis (ABRS) is a subtype of acute rhinosinusitis (ARS). To prevent excessive antibiotic prescribing, clinical criteria for diagnosing ABRS are presented in two major international guidelines from European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps (EPOS2012) and the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA2012). This study aims to assess accuracy of these criteria.
METHODOLOGY: Patients with ARS were recruited. Clinical features were collected including discolored nasal discharge, facial pain, fever, double sickening, symptoms persisting longer than 10 days, and elevated serum C reactive protein (CRP) and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ERS). Using middle meatal bacterial culture as a reference, accuracy of EPOS2012 and IDSA2012 criteria were analyzed.
RESULTS: Eighty-eight patients (age 43.2+/-14.5 years, 67% female) with ARS were recruited. Using the two criteria for diagnosing ABRS, EPOS2012 and IDSA2012 have sensitivity of 50% (95%CI: 38%-62%) versus 69% (95%CI: 57%-79%), specificity of 63% (95%CI: 43%-79%) versus 46% (95%CI: 28%-65%), and accuracy of 53% versus 63%, respectively.
CONCLUSION: Both EPOS2012 and IDSA2012 had modest accuracy. EPOS2012 had less sensitivity but a better specificity compared to IDSA2012. This suggests that IDSA2012 diagnostic criteria may contribute to inappropriate use of antibiotics due to poorer specificity.
Rhinology 56-3: 241-244, 2018
To see the issue content and the abstract you do not have to login
Please login to download the full articles
If you do not have a subscription to Rhinology please consider taking one.
