ArticleJournal of clinical nursing2023
Comparing the impact of two contact isolation modes for hospitalised patients with Clostridioides difficile infection on the quality of care.
Article in Journal of clinical nursing, 2023. 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.
- Comparing the impact of two contact isolation modes for hospitalised patients with Clostridioides difficile infection on the quality of care.Journal of clinical nursing · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClostridioides difficile causes healthcare-associated infections. Environmental spore acquisition is a major mode of transmission. Patient cohorting to prevent cross-transmission in healthcare-institutions is a reasonable component of an enhanced infection control strategy.
objectiveThe purpose of the study was to assess the effect of two different contact isolation modes on the quality of care of hospitalised patients with Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI).
methodsA retrospective cohort-study of patients with CDI hospitalised under one of two contact isolation modes: contact isolation in a multi-patient room without a dedicated nursing team vs. contact isolation in a permanent cohort isolation unit with a dedicated nursing team. Patients' files were reviewed for demographics, clinical characteristics, risk-assessment scores, clinical quality measures including the number of blood tests collected per day, the number of radiological tests applied per day and the time at which a radiological test was conducted, as process measurements, along with the length of stay and mortality, as outcome measures. The STROBE checklist for reporting observational studies was followed.
resultsOne hundred and seventy-eight patients with CDI were included; 100 in a permanent cohort isolation unit and 78 under contact isolation in a multi-patient room. No difference was found in all clinical quality process measures and in all outcome measures. Multivariable logistic regression showed that nursing home residence was associated with in-hospital mortality (OR, 2.51; CI, 1.29-4.97; p = .007), whereas the mode of hospitalisation was not.
conclusionsThe different contact isolation modes of hospitalisation did not compromise the quality of care of patients with CDI. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Cohorting of patients with CDI is used to prevent cross-transmission, though it raises a major concern regarding quality of care. In this study we show there was no compromise in patient care, therefore it is a reasonable component of an enhanced infection control strategy in a hospital setting.
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.