ArticleWorld journal of gastroenterology2013
Clostridium difficile-associated disease: adherence with current guidelines at a tertiary medical center.
Article in World journal of gastroenterology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic stewardship and the 2017 update of the IDSA-SHEA Clinical Practice Guidelines for Clostridium difficile Infection.Diagnosis (Berlin, Germany) · 2018Guideline
- Treatment of Clostridium difficile infection in community teaching hospital: a retrospective study.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2021Article
- Effect of a prospective audit with intervention and feedback on Clostridioides difficile infection management.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2020Article
- Patient Outcomes With Prevented vs NegativeOpen forum infectious diseases · 2020Article
- Treatment of Clostridioides difficile Infection and Non-compliance with Treatment Guidelines in Adults in 10 US Geographical Locations, 2013-2015.Journal of general internal medicine · 2020Article
- Adherence to clinical practice guidelines for the management of Clostridium difficile infection in Japan: a multicenter retrospective study.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2017Observational
- Compliance with Clostridium difficile treatment guidelines: effect on patient outcomes.Epidemiology and infection · 2017Article
- Lack of adherence to SHEA-IDSA treatment guidelines for Clostridium difficile infection is associated with increased mortality.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2017Article
- A Comparison of Current Guidelines of Five International Societies on Clostridium difficile Infection Management.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo assess adherence with the the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA)/ the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) guidelines for management of Clostridium difficile (C. difficile)-associated disease (CDAD) at a tertiary medical center.
methodsAll positive C. difficile stool toxin assays in adults between May 2010 and May 2011 at the University of Maryland Medical Center were identified. CDAD episodes were classified as guideline adherent or non-adherent and these two groups were compared to determine demographic and clinical factors predictive of adherence. Logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the effect of multiple predictors on guideline adherence.
results320 positive C. difficile stool tests were identified in 290 patients. Stratified by disease severity criteria set forth by the SHEA/IDSA guidelines, 42.2% of cases were mild-moderate, 48.1% severe, and 9.7% severe-complicated. Full adherence with the guidelines was observed in only 43.4% of cases. Adherence was 65.9% for mild-moderate CDAD, which was significantly better than in severe cases (25.3%) or severe-complicated cases (35.5%) (P < 0.001). There was no difference in demographics, hospitalization, ICU exposure, recurrence or 30-d mortality between adherent and non-adherent groups. A multivariate model revealed significantly decreased adherence for severe or severe-complicated episodes (OR = 0.18, 95%CI: 0.11-0.30) and recurrent episodes (OR = 0.46, 95%CI: 0.23-0.95).
conclusionOverall adherence with the SHEA/IDSA guidelines for management of CDAD at a tertiary medical center was poor; this was most pronounced in severe, severe-complicated and recurrent cases. Educational interventions aimed at improving guideline adherence are warranted.
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.