Michael S Wang, S. Faheem, Joanna Mangio, Kevin Pham, D. Lloyd, Brianna Hatch-Vallier, E. Johnson
{"title":"The Face of Clostriodes Difficile Infections in the Outpatient Setting","authors":"Michael S Wang, S. Faheem, Joanna Mangio, Kevin Pham, D. Lloyd, Brianna Hatch-Vallier, E. Johnson","doi":"10.51894/001c.12883","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND It has long been well-established that Clostridiodes difficile infections (CDI) can cause severe morbidity and mortality. However, most of the literature to date has focused on hospital-diagnosed infections with less emphasis on clinic-based CDI cases. Guidelines from the 2010 IDSA/SHEA for CDI advocate for metronidazole as first-line therapy for mild to moderate CDI cases. However, the 2017 guidelines recommend oral vancomycin or fidaxomicin as first-line therapy due to their superior efficacy. Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare Clostriodes difficile infections in convenience samples of clinic vs. hospital patients. METHODS In 2019, a retrospective, case-controlled study was performed by the first six authors between 2015-2017 (i.e., prior to the 2017 IDSA/SHEA CDI guidelines) to compare ambulatory and hospital CDI treatment prescriptions. Analytic data included frequency of White blood cells (WBC) and creatinine collection, frequency of severe CDI cases, compliance with the 2010 guidelines, CDI recurrence, and mortality. RESULTS An eligible subgroup of N = 92 hospital patients at Spectrum Health Lakeland were more likely to have WBC (98.4% vs 32.6%, p<0.001) and creatinine (97.8 vs. 39.4, P < 0.001) drawn than 184 patients receiving clinic-based care. Hospital sampled patients were more likely to have severe CDI (46.7% vs 6.7%, p < 0.001). Mortality was less common in hospital patients (1.1% vs. 7.6%, p = 0.017) and the recurrence rates were similar. (21.2% inpatient vs. 28.3% outpatient, (p = 0.224). CONCLUSIONS Based on these results, assessment of CDI severity remains limited in the ambulatory population due to the lack of severity markers. It is unclear if this is due to lack of available laboratory resources or difference in clinical presentation. Of those sample patients who have available markers of severity, patients receiving clinic-based diagnoses were less likely assessed to have severe CDI. Keywords: Cloistriodes difficile infection, ambulatory, severity markers","PeriodicalId":74853,"journal":{"name":"Spartan medical research journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Spartan medical research journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.51894/001c.12883","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
BACKGROUND It has long been well-established that Clostridiodes difficile infections (CDI) can cause severe morbidity and mortality. However, most of the literature to date has focused on hospital-diagnosed infections with less emphasis on clinic-based CDI cases. Guidelines from the 2010 IDSA/SHEA for CDI advocate for metronidazole as first-line therapy for mild to moderate CDI cases. However, the 2017 guidelines recommend oral vancomycin or fidaxomicin as first-line therapy due to their superior efficacy. Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare Clostriodes difficile infections in convenience samples of clinic vs. hospital patients. METHODS In 2019, a retrospective, case-controlled study was performed by the first six authors between 2015-2017 (i.e., prior to the 2017 IDSA/SHEA CDI guidelines) to compare ambulatory and hospital CDI treatment prescriptions. Analytic data included frequency of White blood cells (WBC) and creatinine collection, frequency of severe CDI cases, compliance with the 2010 guidelines, CDI recurrence, and mortality. RESULTS An eligible subgroup of N = 92 hospital patients at Spectrum Health Lakeland were more likely to have WBC (98.4% vs 32.6%, p<0.001) and creatinine (97.8 vs. 39.4, P < 0.001) drawn than 184 patients receiving clinic-based care. Hospital sampled patients were more likely to have severe CDI (46.7% vs 6.7%, p < 0.001). Mortality was less common in hospital patients (1.1% vs. 7.6%, p = 0.017) and the recurrence rates were similar. (21.2% inpatient vs. 28.3% outpatient, (p = 0.224). CONCLUSIONS Based on these results, assessment of CDI severity remains limited in the ambulatory population due to the lack of severity markers. It is unclear if this is due to lack of available laboratory resources or difference in clinical presentation. Of those sample patients who have available markers of severity, patients receiving clinic-based diagnoses were less likely assessed to have severe CDI. Keywords: Cloistriodes difficile infection, ambulatory, severity markers
长期以来,艰难梭菌感染(CDI)可导致严重的发病率和死亡率。然而,到目前为止,大多数文献都集中在医院诊断的感染上,较少强调基于临床的CDI病例。2010年IDSA/SHEA CDI指南提倡将甲硝唑作为轻中度CDI病例的一线治疗。然而,2017年的指南推荐口服万古霉素或非达霉素作为一线治疗,因为它们的疗效更好。目的:本研究的目的是比较门诊和医院患者方便样本中的艰难梭菌感染情况。方法2019年,由前六名作者在2015-2017年(即2017年IDSA/SHEA CDI指南发布之前)进行了一项回顾性病例对照研究,比较门诊和医院CDI治疗处方。分析数据包括白细胞(WBC)和肌酐采集频率,严重CDI病例的频率,2010年指南的依从性,CDI复发和死亡率。结果:在Spectrum Health Lakeland的一个符合条件的亚组(N = 92)患者中,WBC (98.4% vs 32.6%, p<0.001)和肌酐(97.8 vs 39.4, p<0.001)较184名接受临床护理的患者更有可能减少。医院抽样患者更有可能发生严重CDI (46.7% vs 6.7%, p < 0.001)。住院患者的死亡率较低(1.1% vs. 7.6%, p = 0.017),复发率相似。住院患者21.2%对门诊患者28.3%,p = 0.224。结论:基于这些结果,由于缺乏严重程度标志物,在门诊人群中对CDI严重程度的评估仍然有限。目前尚不清楚这是由于缺乏可用的实验室资源还是临床表现的差异。在那些有严重程度标记的样本患者中,接受临床诊断的患者被评估为严重CDI的可能性较小。关键词:艰难梭菌感染,门诊,严重程度指标