首页> 外文OA文献 >Underdiagnosis of Clostridium difficile across Europe: the European, multicentre, prospective, biannual, point-prevalence study of Clostridium difficile infection in hospitalised patients with diarrhoea (EUCLID)
【2h】

Underdiagnosis of Clostridium difficile across Europe: the European, multicentre, prospective, biannual, point-prevalence study of Clostridium difficile infection in hospitalised patients with diarrhoea (EUCLID)

机译:艰难梭菌在欧洲的漏诊:住院腹泻患者中艰难梭菌感染的欧洲,多中心,前瞻性,半年,点患病率研究(EUCLID)

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Background: Variations in testing for Clostridium difficile infection can hinder patients' care, increase the risk of transmission, and skew epidemiological data. We aimed to measure the underdiagnosis of C difficile infection across Europe. Methods: We did a questionnaire-based study at 482 participating hospitals across 20 European countries. Hospitals were questioned about their methods and testing policy for C difficile infection during the periods September, 2011, to August, 2012, and September, 2012, to August, 2013. On one day in winter, 2012–13 (December, 2012, or January, 2013), and summer, 2013 (July or August), every hospital sent all diarrhoeal samples submitted to their microbiology laboratory to a national coordinating laboratory for standardised testing of C difficile infection. Our primary outcome measures were the rates of testing for and cases of C difficile infection per 10 000 patient bed-days. Results of local and national C difficile infection testing were compared with each other. If the result was positive at the national laboratory but negative at the local hospital, the result was classified as undiagnosed C difficile infection. We compared differences in proportions with the Mann-Whitney test, or McNemar's test if data were matched. Findings: During the study period, participating hospitals reported a mean of 65·8 tests (country range 4·6–223·3) for C difficile infection per 10 000 patient-bed days and a mean of 7·0 cases (country range 0·7–28·7) of C difficile infection per 10 000 patient-bed days. Only two-fifths of hospitals reported using optimum methods for testing of C difficile infection (defined by European guidelines), although the number of participating hospitals using optimum methods increased during the study period, from 152 (32%) of 468 in 2011–12 to 205 (48%) of 428 in 2012–13. Across all 482 European hospitals on the two sampling days, 148 (23%) of 641 samples positive for C difficile infection (as determined by the national laboratory) were not diagnosed by participating hospitals because of an absence of clinical suspicion, equating to about 74 missed diagnoses per day. Interpretation: A wide variety of testing strategies for C difficile infection are used across Europe. Absence of clinical suspicion and suboptimum laboratory diagnostic methods mean that an estimated 40 000 inpatients with C difficile infection are potentially undiagnosed every year in 482 European hospitals.
机译:背景:艰难梭菌感染检测方法的变化会阻碍患者的护理,增加传播风险,并使流行病学数据偏倚。我们的目标是衡量整个欧洲艰难梭菌感染的诊断不足。方法:我们在欧洲20个国家的482家参与医院中进行了基于问卷的研究。在2011年9月至2012年8月以及2012年9月至2013年8月期间,对医院进行了艰难梭菌感染的方法和检测政策的询问。在2012-13冬季(2012年12月或2013年1月)和2013年夏天(7月或8月),每家医院都将提交其微生物学实验室的所有腹泻样本送至国家协调实验室,以对艰难梭菌感染进行标准化测试。我们的主要结局指标是每10 000个病人就诊日的艰难梭菌感染检测率和病例数。将本地和全国的艰难梭菌感染测试结果进行了比较。如果结果在国家实验室中为阳性但在当地医院为阴性,则将结果分类为未诊断的艰难梭菌感染。如果数据匹配,我们使用Mann-Whitney检验或McNemar检验比较了比例差异。结果:在研究期间,参与调查的医院报告每10 000病床日平均有65例8次艰难梭菌感染检测(国家范围4例6 223例3),平均7例0例(国家范围)每10 000病床天的艰难梭菌感染率(0·7–28·7)。尽管在研究期间使用最佳方法的参与医院数量有所增加,但只有五分之二的医院报告使用了用于检测艰难梭菌感染的最佳方法(由欧洲准则定义),而在2011-12年度中,使用最佳方法的参与医院数量从468家中的152家(32%)增加在2012-13年度占428的205(占48%)。在两个采样日中,在所有482家欧洲医院中,由于没有临床怀疑,参与医院没有诊断出641例艰难梭菌感染呈阳性(由国家实验室确定)的样本中有148例(23%)没有被诊断出来,约占74例每天错过诊断。解释:在欧洲,针对艰难梭菌感染的测试策略多种多样。缺乏临床怀疑和实验室检查方法的欠佳,意味着每年有482例欧洲医院可能约有40,000例艰难梭菌感染住院患者未被诊断。

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号