Characterization of Continued Antibacterial Therapy After Diagnosis of Hospital-Onset Clostridium difficile Infection: Implications for Antimicrobial Stewardship

Clinical impact of a Clostridioides (Clostridium) difficile bedside infectious disease stewardship intervention

Objectives

To evaluate the clinical impact of a bedside visit to patients with a positive Clostridioides difficile test on the antimicrobial stewardship of C. difficile infection (CDI) and non-C. difficile infections.

Methods

All patients ≥18 years old with positive CDI laboratory tests hospitalized between January 2017 and August 2017 received an immediate bedside intervention that consisted mainly of checking protective measures and providing recommendations on infection control and the management of CDI and other infections.

Results

A total of 214 patients were evaluated. The infectious disease (ID) physician was the first to establish protective measures in 25.2% of the cases. In 22/29 (75.9%) cases, physicians in charge accepted ID consultant recommendations to stop CDI treatment in asymptomatic patients. Unnecessary non-CDI antibiotics were discontinued in 19.1% of the cases. ID recommendations were not accepted by physicians in charge in only 12.6% of the cases.

Conclusions

A bedside rapid intervention for patients with a CDI-positive faecal sample was effective in avoiding overdiagnosis and unnecessary antibiotic treatment, optimizing anti-CDI drugs, increasing compliance with infection control measures and providing educational advice.

Use of Concomitant Antibiotics During Treatment for Clostridium difficile Infection (CDI) in Pediatric Inpatients: An Observational Cohort Study

Concomitant antibiotic use during treatment for Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) increases the risk of recurrence. Across a network of children’s hospitals, 46% of patients treated for CDI received concomitant antibiotics for a median of 7 days. Concomitant antibiotic use was more common among patients with malignancies, and solid organ or bone marrow transplant. Unnecessary concomitant antibiotic use in CDI patients is a potential target for pediatric antimicrobial stewardship.

Strategies to prevent Clostridium difficile infections in acute care hospitals: 2014 update

Previously published guidelines are available that provide comprehensive recommendations for detecting and preventing healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). The intent of this document is to highlight practical recommendations in a concise format designed to assist acute care hospitals in implementing and prioritizing their Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) prevention efforts. This document updates “Strategies to Prevent Clostridium difficile Infections in Acute Care Hospitals,” published in 2008. This expert guidance document is sponsored by the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA) and is the product of a collaborative effort led by SHEA, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), the American Hospital Association (AHA), the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology (APIC), and The Joint Commission, with major contributions from representatives of a number of organizations and societies with content expertise. The list of endorsing and supporting organizations is presented in the introduction to the 2014 updates.

Antimicrobial stewardship: philosophy versus practice

To promote the judicious use of antimicrobials and preserve their usefulness in the setting of growing resistance, a number of policy-making bodies and professional societies have advocated the development of antimicrobial stewardship programs. Although these programs have been implemented at many institutions in the United States, their impact has been difficult to measure. Current recommendations advocate the use of both outcome and process measures as metrics for antimicrobial stewardship. Although patient outcome metrics have the greatest impact on the quality of care, the literature shows that antimicrobial use and costs are the indicators measured most frequently by institutions to justify the effectiveness of antimicrobial stewardship programs. The measurement of more meaningful outcomes has been constrained by difficulties inherent to these measures, lack of funding and resources, and inadequate study designs. Antimicrobial stewardship can be made more credible by refocusing the antimicrobial review process to target specific disease states, reassessing the usefulness of current metrics, and integrating antimicrobial stewardship program initiatives into institutional quality and safety efforts.

Antimicrobial use metrics and benchmarking to improve stewardship outcomes: methodology, opportunities, and challenges

Measurement of antimicrobial use before and after an intervention and the associated outcomes are key activities of antimicrobial stewardship programs. In the United States, the recommended metric for aggregate antibiotic use is days of therapy/1000 patient-days. Clinical outcomes, including response to therapy and bacterial resistance, are critical measures but are more difficult to document than economic outcomes. Interhospital benchmarking of risk adjusted antimicrobial use is possible, although several obstacles remain before it can have an impact on patient care. Many challenges for stewardship programs remain, but the methods and science to support their efforts are rapidly evolving.

Treatment of Clostridium difficile infection in a French university hospital

The management of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) has become very daunting over the past decade because of increased incidence and severity both in hospital and the community. Guidelines recommend metronidazole, vancomycin, or fidaxomicin, depending on clinical presentation.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to describe CDI management and assess empirical CDI therapy complying with practice guidelines.

METHODS

We performed a 2-year prospective cohort study in a university teaching hospital in Lyon, France. Criteria assessing the conformity of CDI patient management were: time elapsed between testing and start of treatment specific to CDI, antibiotics to fight CDI and treatment duration according to infection severity, concomitant therapy, and use of antidiarrheal drugs.

RESULTS

Among 118 patients with confirmed CDI, 98 (83%) were specifically treated for CDI. Severe CDI was observed in 63 patients (53.9%). Treatment included metronidazole alone in 72 patients (73.5%), vancomycin alone in 1 patient (1%), and both in 25 patients (25.5%). The percentage of CDI treatment compliance with published guidelines in our hospital at the study period varied between 22% and 93%. A total of 16 patients (13.6%) died within 30 days after diagnosis. Death was related to CDI in nine patients (56.3% of deceased cases).

CONCLUSION

This study identified significant gaps in our knowledge of CDI treatment. Increasing disease severity highlights the need to investigate antibiotic treatment in severely ill CDI patients, as data on this group are currently lacking.

Challenges and opportunities in the management of Clostridium difficile infection

Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is increasing in all regions of the world where sought. There is no gold standard for diagnosis of CDI, with available tests having limitations. Prevention of CDI will be seen with antibiotic stewardship, improved disinfection of hospitals and nursing homes, chemo- and immuno-prophylaxis and next generation probiotics. The important therapeutic agents are oral vancomycin and fidaxomicin with metronidazole being used only in mild cases or when oral therapy cannot be given. Current therapy of CDI for 10 days is associated with high rate of recurrence that may be prevented by prolonging initial therapy. Future treatment strategies will focus on drugs that inhibit C. difficile, reduce toxin activity and inflammation in the gut, and improve colonic flora diversity.

Diagnosis and management of Clostridium difficile infection

Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is increasing in frequency and severity in and out of the hospital, with a high probability of recurrence after treatment. The recent literature on CDI was reviewed using PubMed to include recent publications dealing with diagnosis and therapy. Real-time polymerase chain reaction is a sensitive and useful diagnostic test for CDI but there are growing concerns of false-positive test results if the rate of CDI is low in the patient population providing samples and/or if the population being studied commonly includes people with C difficile colonization. Recommended therapy of CDI includes oral metronidazole for milder cases of CDI and oral vancomycin or fidaxomicin for more severe cases, each given for 10 days. Colectomy is being performed more frequently in patients with fulminant CDI. For treatment of first recurrences the drug used in the first bout can be used again and for second recurrences longer courses of vancomycin often are given in a tapered dose or intermittently to allow gut flora reconstitution, or other treatments including fidaxomicin may be used. Bacteriotherapy with fecal transplantation is playing an increasing role in therapy of recurrent cases. Metagenomic studies of patients with CDI during successful therapy are needed to determine how best to protect the flora from assaults from antibacterial drugs and to develop optimal therapeutic approaches. Immunotherapy and immunoprophylaxis offer opportunities to prevent CDI, to speed up recovery from CDI, and to eliminate recurrent infection. Humanized monoclonal antitoxin antibodies and active immunization with vaccines against C difficile or its toxins are both in development and appear to be of potential value.

Appropriateness of empiric therapy in patients with suspected Clostridium difficile infection

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that many patients with suspected Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) receive inappropriate empiric therapy and/or receive continued therapy despite negative test results.

METHODS

We performed a 3 month prospective cohort study at the Cleveland Veteran Affairs Medical Center to assess the appropriateness of empiric CDI therapy for all patients with stool samples submitted for CDI testing. Empiric therapy for CDI was considered appropriate if patients with suspected CDI had findings suggestive of severe or complicated illness.

RESULTS

Of 251 patients tested for CDI, 53 (21%) received empiric treatment, including 45 (85%) treated with metronidazole and 8 (15%) treated with vancomycin. Of the 53 empirical therapy regimens, only 20 (38%) were deemed appropriate based on criteria for severe or severe, complicated CDI and 39 (74%) had negative laboratory testing for CDI. Twenty-one of 39 (54%) patients with negative testing were continued on therapy for three or more days despite the negative results. The key limitations of the study are the fact that it was conducted in a single institution and had a small sample size.

CONCLUSION

In our facility, empiric treatment for CDI was common and more than half of empirical treatment was deemed inappropriate because patients did not meet criteria for severe CDI. Because CDI therapy may be associated with adverse effects, there is a need for interventions to improve the appropriateness of empiric CDI treatment.