[dbussone]

Originally Posted by blueash

I will gently disagree with that commonly held belief.

From the CDC;

The presence of purulent sputum is not predictive of bacterial infection. - >95% of patients with purulent sputum do not have pneumonia (J Chron Di 1984; 37:215).

and as you can see from the publication date of 1984, this is not new information. This information is for patients who do not have any underlying chronic pulmonary disease, eg COPD.



http://www.ersj.org.uk/content/38/1/119.full

"Patients producing discoloured sputum were prescribed antibiotics more frequently than those not producing sputum unlike those producing clear/white sputum Antibiotic prescription was not associated with a greater rate or magnitude of symptom score resolution (as measured by a 13-item questionnaire completed by patients each day) among those who: produced yellow or green sputum; reported any of three categories of feeling unwell; or produced discoloured sputum and felt generally unwell.



Adults with acute cough/LRTI presenting in primary care settings with discoloured sputum were prescribed antibiotics more often compared to those not producing sputum. Sputum colour, alone or together with feeling generally unwell, was not associated with recovery or benefit from antibiotic treatment. "



There are many more identical studies. But so many patients just know that they need an antibiotic because... my mucus is green, I don't get better without my Zpak, my cousin got an antibiotic for this exact same illness, I'll end up in the ER if I don't get it from you... that too often doctors who should or do know better just reach for the Rx pad.

Well said. If a test does not provide proof of a bacterial infection there is no need for an antibiotic.