You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 282 No. 2, July 14, 1999 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  The Rational Clinical Examination
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on ISI (46)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related letter
 •Related article
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Topic Collections
 •Bacterial Infections
 •Neurology
 •Diagnosis
 •The Rational Clinical Examination
 •Physical Examination
 •Alert me on articles by topic

Does This Adult Patient Have Acute Meningitis?

John Attia, MD, PhD; Rose Hatala, MD, MSc; Deborah J. Cook, MD, MSc; Jeffrey G. Wong, MD

JAMA. 1999;282:175-181.

Context  Early clinical recognition of meningitis is imperative to allow clinicians to efficiently complete further tests and initiate appropriate therapy.

Objective  To review the accuracy and precision of the clinical examination in the diagnosis of adult meningitis.

Data Sources  A comprehensive review of English- and French-language literature was conducted by searching MEDLINE for 1966 to July 1997, using a structured search strategy. Additional references were identified by reviewing reference lists of pertinent articles.

Study Selection  The search yielded 139 potentially relevant studies, which were reviewed by the first author. Studies were included if they described the clinical examination in the diagnosis of objectively confirmed bacterial or viral meningitis. Studies were excluded if they enrolled predominantly children or immunocompromised adults or focused only on metastatic meningitis or meningitis of a single microbial origin. A total of 10 studies met the criteria and were included in the analysis.

Data Extraction  Validity of the studies was assessed by a critical appraisal of several components of the study design. These components included an assessment of the reference standard used to diagnose meningitis (lumbar puncture or autopsy), the completeness of patient ascertainment, and whether the clinical examination was described in sufficient detail to be reproducible.

Data Synthesis  Individual items of the clinical history have low accuracy for the diagnosis of meningitis in adults (pooled sensitivity for headache, 50% [95% confidence interval {CI}, 32%-68%]; for nausea/vomiting, 30% [95% CI, 22%-38%]). On physical examination, the absence of fever, neck stiffness, and altered mental status effectively eliminates meningitis (sensitivity, 99%-100% for the presence of 1 of these findings). Of the classic signs of meningeal irritation, only 1 study has assessed Kernig sign; no studies subsequent to the original report have evaluated Brudzinski sign. Among patients with fever and headache, jolt accentuation of headache is a useful adjunctive maneuver, with a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 54%, positive likelihood ratio of 2.2, and negative likelihood ratio of 0 for the diagnosis of meningitis.

Conclusions  Among adults with a clinical presentation that is low risk for meningitis, the clinical examination aids in excluding the diagnosis. However, given the seriousness of this infection, clinicians frequently need to proceed directly to lumbar puncture in high-risk patients. Many of the signs and symptoms of meningitis have been inadequately studied, and further prospective research is needed.


Author Affiliations: Departments of Medicine (Drs Attia, Hatala, and Cook) and Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics (Dr Cook), McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario; and Division of General Medical Sciences, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo (Dr Wong). Dr Wong is now with the Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Conn.


RELATED LETTER

Computed Tomography for Predicting Complications of Lumbar Puncture
Osama O. Zaidat, Jose I. Suarez, Rose Hatala, and John Attia
JAMA. 2000;283(8):1004.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

RELATED ARTICLE

July 14, 1999
JAMA. 1999;282(2):201-202.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  


THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

How do I perform a lumbar puncture and analyze the results to diagnose bacterial meningitis?
Straus et al.
JAMA 2006;296:2012-2022.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Community-Acquired Bacterial Meningitis in Adults
van de Beek et al.
NEJM 2006;354:44-53.
FULL TEXT  

Clinical Features and Prognostic Factors in Adults with Bacterial Meningitis
van de Beek et al.
NEJM 2004;351:1849-1859.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Computed Tomography of the Head before Lumbar Puncture in Adults with Suspected Meningitis
Hasbun et al.
NEJM 2001;345:1727-1733.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Computed Tomography for Predicting Complications of Lumbar Puncture
Zaidat et al.
JAMA 2000;283:1004-1004.
FULL TEXT  

Review: the physical examination can exclude the diagnosis of meningitis in low-risk adults
Parrino
Evid. Based Med. 2000;5:28-28.
FULL TEXT  

Helpful Clinical Findings in Meningitis
JWatch Emergency Med. 1999;1999:22-22.
FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1999 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.