ArticleJournal of preventive medicine and hygiene2021
Article in Journal of preventive medicine and hygiene, 2021. 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionClostridium difficile infection (CDI) is currently considered the most common cause of health care-associated infections. The aim is to describe the trend of CDI in an Italian hospital and to assess the efficacy of the measures adopted to manage the burden.
methodsData were retrieved in the San Salvatore Hospital of L'Aquila, from 1 January 2016 to 31 December 2018. Incidence rate of CDIs was calculated as the number of new infected persons per 10,000 patient-days. Changes in the CDI rate during the period considered were analysed using a Joinpoint regression model and related to the preventive strategies adopted. The strategies adopted focused mainly on patient isolation, reinforcement of proper hand hygiene techniques, antimicrobial stewardship and environmental disinfection.
resultsCDI/10,000 patient-days was 6.27 in 2016 and increased to 7.71 in 2017, then drastically decreased to 2.76 during 2018. The Joinpoint regression analysis identified three Joinpoints: Sep-2016, Jan-2017, and Sep-2017. There was a reduction from 2016/01 to 2016/09 (slope = -1.44; p = 0.67), then there was an increase from September 2016 to February 2017 (slope = 30.01; p = 0.29), both statistically not significant. Therefore, there was an important decrement from February 2017 to September 2017, statistically significant (slope = -15.84; p = 0.012).
conclusionsReports based on routine laboratory data can accurately measure population burden of CDI with limited surveillance resources. The adoption of multi-pronged strategies has proven effective in reducing CDI. It's important to keep attention high regarding preventive measures of CDI, also a continuous joint effort by all health professionals, caregivers and patients is needed.
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.