ArticleThe Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale2011
The value of repeat Clostridium difficile toxin testing during and after an outbreak of C difficile-associated diarrhea.
Article in The Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- The simple predictors of pseudomembranous colitis in patients with hospital-acquired diarrhea: a prospective observational study.Gut and liver · 2014Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe recent increase in Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea (CDAD) has led to questions about the reproducibility and sensitivity of C difficile toxin testing (CDTT). While there have been recommendations to repeat CDTT following a negative result, previous studies have failed to show a benefit. However, no studies were performed during an outbreak of CDAD. The value of repeat CDTT after an initial negative result in patients tested during and after an outbreak of CDAD is reported in the present study, as well as the reproducibility of CDTT when multiple samples are received and tested on the same day.
methodsThe results of CDTT, performed using a cell cytotoxicity assay between April 1, 2001, and March 31, 2008, were retrieved and searched for patients who had repeat samples tested after an initial negative result. The result and the number of days after a negative result were determined using the date of the most recent negative test. The cumulative positivity rate was calculated by adding all of the repeat positive test results for the days in question and dividing by the total number of tests performed during that time.
resultsA total of 8661 patients submitted 14,991 stool specimens for CDTT during the study period. There were 3095 samples that tested positive (20.6%) for the toxin. The results were divided into two time periods to reflect the CDAD outbreak, which began in April 2002: period 1 (outbreak) was from April 1, 2002, to March 31, 2006, and period 2 was from April 1, 2006, to March 31, 2008. The rate of positivity was 24.2% during period 1, and 11.6% during period 2 (P<0.001). Repeat CDTT was performed 619 times on samples received on the same day as the initial specimen, and only three (0.5%) were discordant. A total of 1630 samples were retested within one to seven days of a negative result, and 103 (6.3%) tested positive (7.8% period 1 and 2.9% period 2; P=0.002). The likelihood of a positive result on repeat testing in the first three days after a negative result was low (0.9%, 7% and 4%, respectively). The cumulative positivity for repeat testing performed in the first three days was 0.9%, 3.3% and 3.5%, respectively, and did not differ significantly at day 3 during the period of high CDTT positivity (P=0.110).
conclusionsThe value of repeat CDTT, performed using a cell cytotoxicity assay, was low in the first three days after an initial negative result and was unchanged during a CDAD outbreak.
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.