Evidence Hub

Survival at 3, 6 and 12 months in patients diagnosed with community-acquired pneumonia in Colombia: a retrospective cohort study

Eduardo Tuta-Quintero, Daniela Torres-Arevalo, A. Bastidas-Goyes, Hermencia C. Aponte-Murcia, M. Guerrero, Andrea Giraldo, Laura Villarraga, Laura Orjuela et al.

Brazilian Journal of Infectious Diseases, 2024

3,688 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

Background The primary aim of this study is to assess the survival rates of individuals diagnosed with Community-Acquired Pneumonia (CAP) post-hospitalization in Colombia. Additionally, explore potential risk factors associated with decreased long-term survival. Methods A retrospective cohort study was conducted in a hospital in Colombia, evaluating survival at 3, 6 and 12 months in CAP patients, using the Kaplan–Meier method. Stratifications were made by age, sex, comorbidity, and severity. The comparison of survival curves was performed using the Log-Rank test, a multivariate analysis with Cox regression was performed to study possible risk factors that affected 12-month survival in patients with CAP. Results 3688 subjects were admitted, with a mortality of 16.3 % per year. Survival at three, six, and twelve months was 92.9 % (95 % CI 92–93 %), 88.8 % (95 % CI 87–90 %), and 84.2 % (95 % CI 82–85 %), respectively. Analysis stratified by pneumonia severity index, 12-month survival was 98.7 % in Class I, 95.6 % in Class II, 87.41 % in Class III, 77.1 % in Class IV, and 65.8 % in class-V (p < 0.001). Cox-regression showed that being male (HR = 1.44; 95 % CI 1.22‒1.70; p < 0.001), an elevated pneumonia severity index (HR = 4.22; 95 % CI 1.89‒9.43; p < 0.001), a high comorbidity index (HR = 2.29; 95 % CI 1.89‒2.84; p < 0.001) and vasopressor requirement (HR = 2.22; 95 % CI < 0.001) were associated with a lower survival at twelve months of follow-up. Conclusion Survival in…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 3,688 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free