Impact of an Intervention Program on Clostridioides difficile Infections: Comparison of 2 Hospital Cohorts.
BACKGROUND: Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) occurs in various contexts and care settings and is managed by multiple specialists who are not experts in its management. While there are many initiatives to improve the diagnosis and avoid overdiagnosis, there is less focus on the overall manage...
| Autores: | , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2024 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Fundación para el Fomento de la Investigación Sanitaria y Biomédica de la Comunitat Valenciana (FISABIO) |
| Repositorio: | r-FISABIO. Repositorio Institucional de Producción Científica |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:fisabio.fundanetsuite.com:p17941 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://fisabio.portalinvestigacion.com/publicaciones/17941 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | CDI readmissions CDI recurrence Clostridioides difficile infection IDS value continuity of care |
| Sumario: | BACKGROUND: Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) occurs in various contexts and care settings and is managed by multiple specialists who are not experts in its management. While there are many initiatives to improve the diagnosis and avoid overdiagnosis, there is less focus on the overall management of the infection. METHODS: We studied a cohort of patients with a positive test result for toxigenic C difficile in 2 hospitals. Hospital A has a program that provides advice from an infectious disease specialist (IDS) and promotes continuity of care by providing a phone number to contact the IDS. Hospital B does not have any specific CDI program. The evaluation assessed the proportion of patients not treated (carriers or self-limited disease), adherence to Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines, access to novel therapies, recurrence and mortality rates, and readmission and emergency department visits due to CDI. We assessed the program's effectiveness through a logistic regression model adjusted for covariates chosen by clinical criteria. RESULTS: Hospital A avoided more unnecessary treatments (19.3% vs 11.5%), provided access to novel therapies more frequently (35.3% vs 13%), and adhered more closely to current guidelines (95.8% vs 71.3%). Although the mortality and recurrence rates did not differ, the absence of an intervention program was associated with greater odds of admission due to recurrence (odds ratio, 4.19; P = .037) and more visits to the emergency department due to CDI (odds ratio, 8.74; P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a CDI intervention program based on recommendations from IDSs and improved access to specialized care during the follow-up is associated with enhanced quality of CDI management and potential reductions in hospital resource utilization. |
|---|