ArticleAnnals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England2009
Clostridium difficile: how much do hospital staff know about it?
Article in Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Knowledge Assessment of Hospital Nursing Staff in Saudi Arabia RegardingNursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2025Article
- Assessment of Knowledge and Practice of Healthcare Providers in Saudi Arabia RegardingInfection and drug resistance · 2024Article
- Nurses' Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices on the Management ofAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Lack of adherence to SHEA-IDSA treatment guidelines for Clostridium difficile infection is associated with increased mortality.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2017Article
- Microbiology Education in Nursing Practice.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2017Article
- Dentists, antibiotics and Clostridium difficile-associated disease.British dental journal · 2015Review
- Review of medical and surgical management of Clostridium difficile infection.Techniques in coloproctology · 2010Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe aim of this study was to determine the awareness of Clostridium difficile infection amongst healthcare professionals. SUBJECTS AND
methodsA total of 132 healthcare professionals (18 consultants, 40 trainee doctors, and 74 nursing staff) in our hospital were randomly surveyed using a questionnaire consisting of 17 questions covering various aspects of C. difficile.
resultsMore than 50% of healthcare professionals correctly identified C. difficile as an anaerobic bacillus. Half of the consultants and one-third of the trainees and nurses were aware that 5% of adults carry C. difficile in the gut. Overall, 80% of doctors and 40% of nursing staff (P = 0.001) were aware of the spectrum of illnesses caused by C. difficile. Seven (39%) consultants, 25 (63%) trainees, and 26 (37%) nurses correctly identified the various predisposing factors for the acquisition of C. difficile infection. Only one-third of doctors and 8% of nursing staff were aware that antibiotic restriction was the single most effective C. difficile infection control measure. In addition, 40% of doctors and 8% of nursing staff were aware that cytotoxin assay is the gold standard diagnostic test. Less than 30% of healthcare professionals were aware of the differences between the most common strain and the strain of C. difficile responsible for recent outbreaks. Only 6 (33%) consultants, 21 (53%) trainees (P = not significant), and 28 (38%) nursing staff were aware that hand washing with soap and water is the most effective way of preventing transmission of C. difficile infection. Results showed that 93% of trainees, 78% of consultants (P = 0.05) and 70% of nurses correctly answered that oral metronidazole is the drug of choice for the treatment of C. difficile infection. Compared to 73% of trainees, only two (11%) consultants (P < 0.0001) and 20 (27%) nursing staff correctly stated that oral vancomycin is the second-line treatment for persistent symptomatic C. difficile infection.
conclusionsThere is a significant lack of knowledge concerning C. difficile infection amongst healthcare professions, in particular amongst consultants and nurses in our hospital.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.