Hi everyone, jumping a bit late to this discussion. Thought the article was very relevant for our current practice.
I wonder if the the same clinician would have change their management if they had or didn't have a procalcitonin level available or whether this was assessed.
I see procalcitonin as an extra piece of information that is useful when the value is in Tiers 1 or 4. As the article suggest, when the value is <0.1 or >0.5, it is useful and even reassuring.
However, this lab becomes controversial when it does not correlate with the clinical picture (i.e. clinically ill patient that could benefit from antibiotics with procalcitonin <0.1, or vice versa). Were clinicians asked if they would have prescribed antibiotics based on clinical signs but refrained from doing so based on lab values?
Easy one-click social registrationIs this safe?
We only receive the minimum information necessary to verify your account. We never get access to your friends/contacts or your profile, and we never post on your behalf. Your social account is used for logging in only.ORRegister via email
Send me updates on this Contest
In order to ensure a fair voting process and to make sure that no one votes more than once, we ask that you register either with a social networking account (easiest, only requires one click) or by registering with your email address (this will require you to click on a verification email that we will send you).
You only need to register once.