Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Is it time to rethink the urea criterion in CURB-65?To the Editors:We read the article by CAPELASTEGUI et al. [1] on the validation of the severity assessment rules for the management of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) with interest.The authors concluded that CURB-65 (confusion, urea .7 mmol?L -1 , respiratory rate o30?min -1 , low systolic (,90 mmHg) or diastolic (f60 mmHg) blood pressure, and aged o65 yrs) and CRB-65 indices recommended by the British Thoracic Society are indeed useful and easy to apply in day-to-day clinical practice, thereby helping in risk stratification and management as demonstrated by LIM et al. [2].
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kamath et al. (2006) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: