针对急诊室和住院腹泻患者的艰难梭菌腹泻多变量毒性模型和风险评分的推导与内部验证。

Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE Pub Date : 2024-04-29 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1017/ash.2024.58
Sarah Davies, Jimmy Zhang, Yongjun Yi, Eric R Burge, Marc Desjardins, Peter C Austin, Carl van Walraven
{"title":"针对急诊室和住院腹泻患者的艰难梭菌腹泻多变量毒性模型和风险评分的推导与内部验证。","authors":"Sarah Davies, Jimmy Zhang, Yongjun Yi, Eric R Burge, Marc Desjardins, Peter C Austin, Carl van Walraven","doi":"10.1017/ash.2024.58","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Many factors have been associated with the risk of toxigenic <i>C. difficile</i> diarrhea (TCdD). This study derived and internally validated a multivariate model for estimating the risk of TCdD in patients with diarrhea using readily available clinical factors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A random sample of 3,050 symptomatic emergency department or hospitalized patients undergoing testing for toxigenic <i>C. difficile</i> at a single teaching hospital between 2014 and 2018 was created. Unformed stool samples positive for both glutamate dehydrogenase antigen by enzyme immunoassay and <i>tcdB</i> gene by polymerase chain reaction were classified as TCdD positive. The TCdD Model was created using logistic regression and was modified to the TCdD Risk Score to facilitate its use.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>8.1% of patients were TCdD positive. TCdD risk increased with abdominal pain (adjusted odds ratio 1.3; 95% CI, 1.0-1.8), previous <i>C. difficile</i> diarrhea (2.5, 1.1-6.1), and prior antibiotic exposure, especially when sampled in the emergency department (4.2, 2.5-7.0) versus the hospital (1.7, 1.3-2.3). TCdD risk also increased when testing occurred earlier during the hospitalization encounter, when age and white cell count increased concurrently, and with decreased eosinophil count. In internal validation, the TCdD Model had moderate discrimination (optimism-corrected C-statistic 0.65, 0.62-0.68) and good calibration (optimism-corrected Integrated Calibration Index [ICI] 0.017, 0.001-0.022). Performance decreased slightly for the TCdD Risk Score (C-statistic 0.63, 0.62-0.63; ICI 0.038, 0.004-0.038).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>TCdD risk can be predicted using readily available clinical risk factors with modest accuracy.</p>","PeriodicalId":72246,"journal":{"name":"Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11062795/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Derivation and internal validation of the multivariate toxigenic <i>C. difficile</i> diarrhea model and risk score for emergency room and hospitalized patients with diarrhea.\",\"authors\":\"Sarah Davies, Jimmy Zhang, Yongjun Yi, Eric R Burge, Marc Desjardins, Peter C Austin, Carl van Walraven\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/ash.2024.58\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Many factors have been associated with the risk of toxigenic <i>C. difficile</i> diarrhea (TCdD). This study derived and internally validated a multivariate model for estimating the risk of TCdD in patients with diarrhea using readily available clinical factors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A random sample of 3,050 symptomatic emergency department or hospitalized patients undergoing testing for toxigenic <i>C. difficile</i> at a single teaching hospital between 2014 and 2018 was created. Unformed stool samples positive for both glutamate dehydrogenase antigen by enzyme immunoassay and <i>tcdB</i> gene by polymerase chain reaction were classified as TCdD positive. The TCdD Model was created using logistic regression and was modified to the TCdD Risk Score to facilitate its use.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>8.1% of patients were TCdD positive. TCdD risk increased with abdominal pain (adjusted odds ratio 1.3; 95% CI, 1.0-1.8), previous <i>C. difficile</i> diarrhea (2.5, 1.1-6.1), and prior antibiotic exposure, especially when sampled in the emergency department (4.2, 2.5-7.0) versus the hospital (1.7, 1.3-2.3). TCdD risk also increased when testing occurred earlier during the hospitalization encounter, when age and white cell count increased concurrently, and with decreased eosinophil count. In internal validation, the TCdD Model had moderate discrimination (optimism-corrected C-statistic 0.65, 0.62-0.68) and good calibration (optimism-corrected Integrated Calibration Index [ICI] 0.017, 0.001-0.022). Performance decreased slightly for the TCdD Risk Score (C-statistic 0.63, 0.62-0.63; ICI 0.038, 0.004-0.038).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>TCdD risk can be predicted using readily available clinical risk factors with modest accuracy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72246,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11062795/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/ash.2024.58\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ash.2024.58","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:许多因素与艰难梭菌毒素性腹泻(TCdD)的风险有关。本研究利用现成的临床因素,推导并内部验证了一个多变量模型,用于估计腹泻患者的毒性艰难梭菌腹泻风险:随机抽取了 2014 年至 2018 年间在一家教学医院接受毒性艰难梭菌检测的 3050 名无症状急诊科或住院患者。通过酶联免疫法检测谷氨酸脱氢酶抗原和聚合酶链反应检测 tcdB 基因均呈阳性的未成形粪便样本被归类为 TCdD 阳性。采用逻辑回归法建立了 TCdD 模型,并将其修改为 TCdD 风险评分,以方便使用:结果:8.1%的患者为 TCdD 阳性。TCdD风险随腹痛(调整后的几率比1.3;95% CI,1.0-1.8)、既往艰难梭菌腹泻(2.5,1.1-6.1)和既往抗生素暴露而增加,尤其是在急诊科(4.2,2.5-7.0)与医院(1.7,1.3-2.3)采样时。当检测在住院期间较早进行、年龄和白细胞计数同时增加以及嗜酸性粒细胞计数减少时,TCdD 风险也会增加。在内部验证中,TCdD 模型具有中等辨别能力(乐观校正 C 统计量 0.65,0.62-0.68)和良好的校准能力(乐观校正综合校准指数 [ICI] 0.017,0.001-0.022)。TCdD 风险评分的性能略有下降(C 统计量 0.63,0.62-0.63;ICI 0.038,0.004-0.038):结论:使用现成的临床风险因素可以预测 TCdD 风险,准确度不高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Derivation and internal validation of the multivariate toxigenic C. difficile diarrhea model and risk score for emergency room and hospitalized patients with diarrhea.

Background: Many factors have been associated with the risk of toxigenic C. difficile diarrhea (TCdD). This study derived and internally validated a multivariate model for estimating the risk of TCdD in patients with diarrhea using readily available clinical factors.

Methods: A random sample of 3,050 symptomatic emergency department or hospitalized patients undergoing testing for toxigenic C. difficile at a single teaching hospital between 2014 and 2018 was created. Unformed stool samples positive for both glutamate dehydrogenase antigen by enzyme immunoassay and tcdB gene by polymerase chain reaction were classified as TCdD positive. The TCdD Model was created using logistic regression and was modified to the TCdD Risk Score to facilitate its use.

Results: 8.1% of patients were TCdD positive. TCdD risk increased with abdominal pain (adjusted odds ratio 1.3; 95% CI, 1.0-1.8), previous C. difficile diarrhea (2.5, 1.1-6.1), and prior antibiotic exposure, especially when sampled in the emergency department (4.2, 2.5-7.0) versus the hospital (1.7, 1.3-2.3). TCdD risk also increased when testing occurred earlier during the hospitalization encounter, when age and white cell count increased concurrently, and with decreased eosinophil count. In internal validation, the TCdD Model had moderate discrimination (optimism-corrected C-statistic 0.65, 0.62-0.68) and good calibration (optimism-corrected Integrated Calibration Index [ICI] 0.017, 0.001-0.022). Performance decreased slightly for the TCdD Risk Score (C-statistic 0.63, 0.62-0.63; ICI 0.038, 0.004-0.038).

Conclusions: TCdD risk can be predicted using readily available clinical risk factors with modest accuracy.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信