Evidence Hub

Aetiology and risks factors associated with the fatal outcomes of childhood pneumonia among hospitalised children in the Philippines from 2008 to 2016: a case series study

Bindongo P. P. Dembele, Taro Kamigaki, Clyde Dapat, R. Tamaki, M. Saito, Mayuko Saito, M. Okamoto, M. Igoy et al.

BMJ Open, 2019

5,054 participants · 40 citations

Abstract

Objective Pneumonia remains the leading cause of hospitalisations and deaths among children aged <5 years. Diverse respiratory pathogens cause acute respiratory infections, including pneumonia. Here, we analysed viral and bacterial pathogens and risk factors associated with death of hospitalised children. Design A 9-year case series study. Setting Two secondary-care hospitals, one tertiary-care hospital and one research centre in the Philippines. Participants 5054 children aged <5 years hospitalised with severe pneumonia. Methods Nasopharyngeal swabs for virus identification, and venous blood samples for bacterial culture were collected. Demographic, clinical data and laboratory findings were collected at admission time. Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify the factors associated with death. Results Of the enrolled patients, 57% (2876/5054) were males. The case fatality rate was 4.7% (238/5054), showing a decreasing trend during the study period (p<0.001). 55.0% of the patients who died were either moderately or severely underweight. Viruses were detected in 61.0% of the patients, with respiratory syncytial virus (27.0%) and rhinovirus (23.0%) being the most commonly detected viruses. In children aged 2–59 months, the risk factors significantly associated with death included age of 2–5 months, sensorial changes, severe malnutrition, grunting, central cyanosis, decreased breath sounds, tachypnoea, fever (≥38.5°C), saturation of peripheral oxygen <90%,…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 5,054 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