Literature DB >> 21439999

Mandatory reporting and improvements in diagnosing Clostridium difficile infection: an incompatible dichotomy?

Simon D Goldenberg1, Nicholas M Price, David Tucker, Paul Wade, Gary L French.   

Abstract

Toxin enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) are inadequate for the diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) when used alone. In September 2010 we replaced toxin EIA with a two-step algorithm, testing first with glutamate dehydrogenase and confirming with polymerase chain reaction for toxin B gene. We compared this to the gold standard of toxigenic culture, observing a positive predictive value of 96% (laboratory prevalence of 4.7%). There was no deterioration in turnaround time but there was a decrease of 11% in repeat specimens sent from the same patients. The improved performance of the algorithm increased the laboratory positivity rate from 2.2% to 5.6%. This led to an increase in our Trust CDI rate reported under the Health Protection Agency's mandatory surveillance scheme. We investigated whether the change was due to increasing nosocomial transmission, environmental contamination or consumption of antimicrobials, but found no evidence of this. We conclude that it probably resulted from the change in testing algorithm. Although we have improved testing and enhanced patient safety, we are likely to be unfairly financially penalised because of our apparent (but not real) increase in CDI rates. Assessment of CDI rates should take testing methodology into account and national policies should be revised to reflect this.
Copyright © 2011 The British Infection Association. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21439999     DOI: 10.1016/j.jinf.2011.03.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Infect        ISSN: 0163-4453            Impact factor:   6.072


  4 in total

1.  Impact of change to molecular testing for Clostridium difficile infection on healthcare facility-associated incidence rates.

Authors:  Rebekah W Moehring; Eric T Lofgren; Deverick J Anderson
Journal:  Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol       Date:  2013-08-29       Impact factor: 3.254

2.  Dual Reporting of Clostridioides difficile PCR and Predicted Toxin Result Based on PCR Cycle Threshold Reduces Treatment of Toxin-Negative Patients without Increases in Adverse Outcomes.

Authors:  Matthew M Hitchcock; Marisa Holubar; Catherine A Hogan; Lucy S Tompkins; Niaz Banaei
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2019-10-23       Impact factor: 5.948

3.  Economic evaluation of laboratory testing strategies for hospital-associated Clostridium difficile infection.

Authors:  Lee F Schroeder; Elizabeth Robilotti; Lance R Peterson; Niaz Banaei; David W Dowdy
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2013-11-27       Impact factor: 5.948

4.  Impact of the introduction of a nucleic acid amplification test for Clostridium difficile diagnosis on stool rejection policies.

Authors:  J Goret; J Blanchi; P Floch; O Peuchant; D Chrisment; R Sanchez; H Biessy; R Lemarié; D Leyssene; B Loutfi; S Mimouni; T Flao; C Bébéar; F Mégraud
Journal:  Gut Pathog       Date:  2018-05-30       Impact factor: 4.181

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.