Management of Community-Acquired Pneumonia in an Elderly Patient

Chief complaint: shortness of breath and cough x 5 days
History of Present Illness: A 75-year-old female presented to the hospital ER with shortness of breath, fatigue, a purulent cough, chest pain and (subjective) fever. In the emergency department, the patient was found to be hypoxic with an oxygen saturation of 88% (on room air) and respiratory rate of 22. A chest x-ray, sputum culture, respiratory viral panel testing (influenza, RSV, Basic Respiratory Viral Panel) and SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) tests were obtained. The patient was admitted to the general medicine unit.
Past Medical History:
Hypothyroidism
Osteoporosis
T2DM
HTN
Gastric reflux disease
Social History:
Non-smoker, ETOH occasionally, currently retired (former teacher)
Family History:
Mother – deceased, no significant medical history
Father – deceased, history of T2DM and MI
Allergies:
PCN –rash when she was a child (has tolerated cephalosporins in the past)
Home Medications:
Levothyroxine 100mcg PO daily
Fosamax 70mg PO weekly
Metformin 500mg PO BID
Lisinopril 10 mg PO daily
Calcium carbonate (Tums) 1-4 tablets PO daily PRN acid reflux
Physical Exam:
General: underweight, slightly ill-appearing female
Height: 65 inches
Weight: 47.7 kg
Vitals: BP – 141/91; HR – 110.; Temp – 101.8 F; RR – 22; O2 sat 88% on room air
HEENT: normal
Cardiac: mild tachycardia, regular rate and rhythm
Resp: wheezes and crackles, purulent cough
Abdomen: soft, positive bowel sounds, no flank pain
Neuro: awake, oriented to person, place and time
Genitourinary: no dysuria or increased frequency
Extremities: normal
Labs:
Comprehensive Metabolic Panel:
Sodium (134-145 mmol/L) 134
Potassium (3.5-5.2 mmol/L) 3.5
Chloride 96-106 mmol/L) 100
CO2 (20-29 mmol/L) 28
Glucose (65-99 mg/dL) 198
BUN (9-20 mg/dL) 10
Creatinine (0.76-1.27 mg/dL) 1.6
Calcium ((8.7-10.2 mg/dL) 9.1
Alkaline Phosphatase 62
ALT (0-44 IU/L) 30
AST (0-40 IU/L) 32
CBC:
WBC (3.4-10.83 µL) 19.1
Hemoglobin (13.0-17.7 g/dL) 12.8
Hematocrit (37.5-51.0%) 38.9
Platelet Count (150-4503 µL) 251
WBC differentials (normal range) Result
Neutrophils (40-60%) 80%
Lymphocytes (20-40%) 16%
Monocytes (2-8%) 2%
Eosinophils (1-4%) 1.5%
Basophils (0.5-1%) <0.5%
ESR (normal range is 0-22 mm/hr) 32mm/hr
CRP (normal <1.0 mg/dL) 18.2 mg/dL
Procalcitonin (normal < 0.1 ng/mL) 0.8 ng/mL
Fourth Generation HIV1/2 Immunoassay: negative
ECG: QTc prolonged, 498 ms (normal <460 ms)
Imaging:
Chest x-ray: bilateral pulmonary infiltrates suggestive of pneumonia
Microbiology:
SARS-CoV-2 PCR – negative
Respiratory viral panel (basic)-negative
MRSA nasal swab-negative
Sputum gram stain: Gram-positive cocci in pairs and chains
Sputum culture: Streptococcus pneumoniae
Streptococcus pneumoniae   Susceptibility
MIC (mcg/mL            Interpretation
Penicillin 0.12 Resistant
Ceftriaxone ≤1 Susceptible
Doxycycline ≤0.25 Susceptible
Erythromycin ≥8 Resistant
Levofloxacin ≥4 Resistant
Trimethoprim + Sulfamethoxazole ≥56 Resistant
Vancomycin ≤0.5 Susceptible
The patient is diagnosed with a community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). Please answer the following questions pertaining to this case in Blackboard.
1. What laboratory and/or clinical findings in this patient are consistent with the diagnosis of an infection?
2. After reviewing the workup of the patient, what specific findings may affect the antimicrobial agent you choose? List at least 5.
3. The microbiology lab reports that this isolate of S. pneumoniae is resistant to penicillin.  What is the mechanism of resistance of S. pneumoniae to penicillin?
4. The attending physician wants to treat the pneumonia with IV levofloxacin. Do you have any concerns with the use of levofloxacin in this patient?
5. Based on your assessment of the patient, how would you initially manage the patient’s pneumonia? Include drug, dose, duration, pertinent monitoring/follow-up and patient counseling.

None of the statements are correct

Suppose a researcher is investigating the measurement ability of a new device intended to read the freezing point of a chemical compound. The substance used in the investigation has a known freezing point of -24 degrees Celsius. The researcher conducted a series of 10 sample measurements of the freezing point, and the results are represented below. Which of the following statements about the device with regards to its precision and potential bias are true? Measurement Freezing Point (degrees Celsius) 1 -26 2 -18 3 -32 4 -31 5 -24 6 -24 7 -24 8 -24 9 -11 10 -37 The device seems to be relatively imprecise, as most of the observations vary about the true freezing point. The device is, however, relatively unbiased, since there are quite a few observations that capture the true freezing point. Both A and B are correct. None of the statements are correct.

 

The Legal and Ethical Issues in Treating Psychiatric Emergencies: Confidentiality and Patient Autonomy

Select one of the following topics, and explain one legal issue and one ethical issue related to this topic that may apply within the context of treating psychiatric emergencies: patient autonomy, EMTALA, confidentiality, HIPAA privacy rule, HIPAA security rule, protected information, legal gun ownership, career obstacles (security clearances/background checks), and payer source.

 

Understanding State Laws on Involuntary Psychiatric Holds for Child and Adult Psychiatric Emergencies

Explain your state laws for involuntary psychiatric holds for child and adult psychiatric emergencies. Include who can hold a patient and for how long, who can release the emergency hold, and who can pick up the patient after a hold is released.

The Importance of Summarizing and Analyzing Research Articles

 

Being able to summarize and analyze a research article is important not only for showing your professor that you have understood your assigned reading, but it also is the first step to learning how to write your own research papers and literature reviews. The summary section of this assignment will show that you understood the basic facts of the research. The analysis portion will show that you can evaluate the evidence presented in the research and explain why the research could be important.
Why was the research done?
What happened in the experiment?
What conclusions did the author draw?
Was this research effective at answering the research question?
Was the purpose of the study properly addressed by the experiment?
● Was the scope of the paper too broad or narrow?
○ Was there any unnecessary information?
○ Was there not enough information?
● Was there anything about the study that could be improved?
○ Consider factors such as sample size, confounding factors, potential errors, etc.
○ Were there any limitations that prevented them from improving the study in this
way?
● Was the author’s interpretation of the results valid? Why or why not? Were there possible
alternate explanations for the results?
● If there are issues with the research, does the author address them?
● Was the article overall clear, effective, and well written?
How is this research relevant or important?
What is the usefulness of this study in the larger context? What further research could
build on it?
● Does this research build upon old information or is it something new? Does it contradict
something previously thought to be true?
● Is the author funded by an organization that might imply skewed results?
The paper chosen is https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0293884.