Complications of Hospital-Onset Healthcare Facility-Associated Clostridium difficile Infections Among Veterans

Frontline perspectives of C. difficile infection prevention practice implementation within veterans affairs health care facilities: A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

In 2012, the veteran's affairs (VA) multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO) Program Office launched a national Clostridioides difficile Infection (CDI) Prevention Initiative to address CDI as the most common cause of healthcare associated infections, mandating use of a VA CDI Bundle of prevention practices in inpatient facilities. We draw upon frontline worker perspectives to explore work system barriers and facilitators to the sustained implementation of the VA CDI Bundle using the systems engineering initiative for patient safety (SEIPS) framework.

METHODS

We interviewed 29 key stakeholders at 4 participating sites between October 2019-July 2021. Participants included infection prevention and control (IPC) leaders, nurses, physicians, and environmental management staff. Interviews were analyzed to identify themes and perceptions of facilitators and barriers to CDI prevention.

RESULTS

IPC leadership was most likely to know of the specific VA CDI Bundle components. Other participants demonstrated general knowledge of CDI prevention practices, with role-based variation in the depth of awareness of specific practices. Facilitators included leadership support, mandated CDI training and prevention practices, and readily available training from multiple sources. Barriers included limits to communication about facility or unit-level CDI rates, ambiguous communications about CDI prevention practice updates and VA mandates, and role-hierarchies that may limit team members' clinical contributions.

DISCUSSION

Recommendations include improving centrally-mandated clarity about and standardization of CDI prevention policies, including testing. Regular IPC training updates for all clinical stakeholders are also recommended.

CONCLUSIONS

A work system analysis using SEIPS identified barriers and facilitators to CDI prevention practices that could be addressed both nationally at the system level and locally at the facility level, specifically in the areas of communication and coordination.

Critical Care Management of the Patient with Clostridioides difficile

OBJECTIVES

To review published clinical evidence on management of Clostridioides difficile infection in critically ill patients.

DATA SOURCES

We obtained relevant studies from a PubMed literature review and bibliographies of reviewed articles.

STUDY SELECTION

We selected English-language studies addressing aspects of C. difficile infection relevant to critical care clinicians including epidemiology, risk factors, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention, with a focus on high-quality clinical evidence.

DATA EXTRACTION

We reviewed potentially relevant studies and abstracted information on study design, methods, patient selection, and results of relevant studies. This is a synthetic (i.e., not systematic) review.

DATA SYNTHESIS

C. difficile infection is the most common healthcare-associated infection in the United States. Antibiotics are the most significant C. difficile infection risk factor, and among antibiotics, cephalosporins, clindamycin, carbapenems, fluoroquinolones, and piperacillin-tazobactam confer the highest risk. Age, diabetes mellitus, inflammatory bowel disease, and end-stage renal disease are risk factors for C. difficile infection development and mortality. C. difficile infection diagnosis is based on testing appropriately selected patients with diarrhea or on clinical suspicion for patients with ileus. Patients with fulminant disease (C. difficile infection with hypotension, shock, ileus, or megacolon) should be treated with oral vancomycin and IV metronidazole, as well as rectal vancomycin in case of ileus. Patients who do not respond to initial therapy should be considered for fecal microbiota transplant or surgery. Proper infection prevention practices decrease C. difficile infection risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Strong clinical evidence supports limiting antibiotics when possible to decrease C. difficile infection risk. For patients with fulminant C. difficile infection, oral vancomycin reduces mortality, and adjunctive therapies (including IV metronidazole) and interventions (including fecal microbiota transplant) may benefit select patients. Several important questions remain regarding fulminant C. difficile infection management, including which patients benefit from fecal microbiota transplant or surgery.

Effect of an antimicrobial stewardship intervention on outcomes for patients with Clostridium difficile infection

BACKGROUND

Although antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) are uniquely positioned to improve treatment of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) through targeted interventions, studies to date have not rigorously evaluated the influence of ASP involvement on clinical outcomes attributed to CDI.

METHODS

We performed a quasiexperimental study of adult patients with CDI before (n = 307) and after (n = 285) a real-time ASP review was initiated. In the intervention group, an ASP pharmacist was notified of positive CDI results and consulted with the care team to initiate optimal therapy, minimize concomitant antibiotic and acid-suppressive therapy, and recommend surgical/infectious diseases consultation in complicated cases. The primary outcome was a composite of attributable 30-day mortality, intensive care unit admission, colectomy/ileostomy, and recurrence.

RESULTS

A higher percentage of patients in the ASP intervention group had acid-suppressive therapy discontinued (30% vs 13%; P < .01). Among patients with severe CDI, more patients in the intervention group received an infectious diseases consultation (17% vs 10%; P = .04), received appropriate therapy with oral vancomycin (87% vs 59%; P <.01), and vancomycin was initiated earlier (mean, 1.1 vs 1.7 days; P <.01). Incidence of the composite outcome was not significantly different between the 2 groups (12.3% vs 14.7%; P = .40).

CONCLUSIONS

ASP review and intervention improved CDI process measures. A decrease in composite outcomes was not found, which may be due to low baseline rates of attributable complications in our institution.