ArticleClinical and experimental gastroenterology2015
Risk factors for recurrent hospital-acquired Clostridium difficile infection in a Japanese university hospital.
Article in Clinical and experimental gastroenterology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Global burden ofJournal of global health · 2019Pooled it
- Magnitude and direction of the association between Clostridium difficile infection and proton pump inhibitors in adults and pediatric patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of gastroenterology · 2018Pooled it
- Association of Gastric Acid Suppression With Recurrent Clostridium difficile Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JAMA internal medicine · 2017Pooled it
- Safety and immunogenicity of Clostridium difficile toxoid vaccine in Japanese adults.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2018Trial
- Clostridioides difficile recurrence in individuals with and without cancer: a Swedish population-based cohort study.Infection · 2024Article
- Implementation of multifaceted diagnostic stewardship forAntimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2024Article
- Excess length of hospital stay, mortality and cost attributable toEpidemiology and infection · 2020Article
- Risk factors for recurrent Clostridium difficile infection in a tertiary hospital in Israel.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2018Article
- The Epidemiology of Clostridium difficile Infection in Japan: A Systematic Review.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClostridium difficile infection (CDI) is a highly prevalent hospital-associated infection. Although most patients respond well to discontinuation of antibiotics, 20%-30% of patients relapse. To initiate early therapeutic measures, the risk factors for recurrent CDI must be identified, although very few Japanese studies have used standard surveillance definitions to identify these risk factors.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients with health care facility-onset CDI between August 2011 and September 2013. Patients with diarrhea who were positive for Clostridium difficile (via an enzyme immunoassay) were defined as having CDI. Clinical data (eg, demographics, comorbidities, medication, laboratory results, and clinical outcomes) were evaluated, and multivariate analysis was used to identify risk factors that were associated with recurrent CDI.
resultsSeventy-six health care facility-onset CDI cases were identified, with an incidence rate of 0.8 cases per 10,000 patient-days. Fourteen cases (18.4%) were recurrent, with 13 patients having experienced a single recurrent episode and one patient having experienced three recurrent episodes. The 30-day and 90-day mortality rates were 7.9% and 14.5%, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that recurrent patients were more likely to have underlying malignant disease (odds ratio: 7.98; 95% confidence interval: 1.22-52.2; P=0.03) and a history of intensive care unit hospitalization (odds ratio: 49.9; 95% confidence interval: 1.01-2,470; P=0.049).
conclusionIntensive care unit hospitalization and malignancy are risk factors for recurrent CDI. Patients with these factors should be carefully monitored for recurrence and provided with appropriate antimicrobial stewardship.
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.