Management of suspected infectious diarrhoea by English GPs: are they right?

Management and characteristics of patients suffering from Clostridiodes difficile infection in primary care

Background

Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) is rising and increases patient healthcare costs due to extended hospitalisation, tests and medications. Management of CDI in French primary care is poorly reported.

Objectives

To characterise patients suffering from CDI, managed in primary care and describe their clinical outcomes.

Methods

Retrospective observational study based on survey data among 500 randomly selected General Practitioners (GPs) surveyed in France from September 2018 to April 2019. GPs were asked to complete a multiple-choice questionnaire for each reported patient presenting a CDI. Responses were analysed according to clinical characteristics. Treatment strategies were compared according to the outcome: recovery or recurrent infection.

Results

Participation rate was 8.6% (n = 43/500) with two incomplete questionnaires. Data from 41 patients with an actual diagnosis of CDI were analysed. Recovery was observed in 61% of patients with a confirmed diagnosis of CDI. In the recovery group, this was exclusively a primary episode, most patients (72%) had no comorbidities, were significantly younger (p = 0.02) than the ones who relapsed and 92% were successfully treated with oral metronidazole. Duration of diarrhoea after antimicrobial treatment initiation was significantly shorter in the recovery group (≤ 48 h) (p = 0.03). Cooperation with hospital specialists was reported in 28% of the recovery group versus 87.5% of the recurrent group (p = 0.0003). Overall, GPs managed successfully 82.9% of cases without need of hospital admission.

Conclusion

GPs provide relevant ambulatory care for mild primary episodes of CDI using oral metronidazole. Persistent diarrhoea despite an appropriate anti-Clostridiodes regimen should be interpreted as an early predictor of relapse.

Multiplex PCR for Detection and Identification of Microbial Pathogens

 Multiplexed nucleic acid-based tests for infectious disease have become a standard part of clinical laboratory practice. These tests provide a comprehensive syndrome-based approach to determine the etiological agent of disease. The technology underlying these different systems is reviewed here with a special focus on the BioFire FilmArray® platform. The literature on the clinical utility and cost-effectiveness of these platforms for respiratory, blood culture, and gastrointestinal infections is discussed. Although there are reports showing a clear benefit to the patient or to the healthcare system from adopting a syndromic molecular approach, it is also apparent that clinical laboratories and healthcare providers are still learning how to take full advantage of the new systems. Finally, some improvements to this technology that should appear in the next few years are discussed. These include automated pathogen-specific surveillance based on aggregating the data from these systems, a move toward point-of-care syndromic testing, and further decreases in time to result of the tests.

Patients' perspectives on providing a stool sample to their GP: a qualitative study

Background

Stool specimen collection is challenging and informal feedback has indicated that participants find the process difficult. Increasing stool specimen returns would improve the investigation of outbreaks of diarrhoeal and food-borne disease.

Aim

To explore the barriers to stool sample collection and specimen return to ascertain which factors may help to improve the process.

Design and setting

Qualitative patient interview study in Gloucester, UK.

Method

A two-stage purposive sampling process was used to identify patients who had either previous experience or no experience of collecting a stool sample. The interview schedule, based on the theory of planned behaviour, was used to facilitate interviews with 26 patients. Interview transcripts were analysed using a modified framework analysis.

Results

Barriers to collection included embarrassment, fear of results, concerns around hygiene and contamination, discretion and privacy, and lack of information. Personal gain was identified as the main incentive to collecting and returning a stool sample. The need for an information leaflet on stool collection was emphasised by most patients.

Conclusions

GPs could make a number of small changes that could make a big difference for patients and potentially increase stool sample return. If they, rather than receptionists, distributed collection kits it may be easier for patients to ask any questions they had regarding collection. In addition, the provision of a stool-collection information leaflet could increase patients’ confidence regarding collecting the sample, and providing drop-off boxes for specimens could help prevent patients’ embarrassment regarding handing their stool over to a receptionist.

Acute Gastroenteritis and Campylobacteriosis in Swiss Primary Care: The Viewpoint of General Practitioners

Acute gastroenteritis (AG) is frequently caused by infectious intestinal diseases (IID) including food- and waterborne pathogens of public health importance. Among these pathogens, Campylobacter spp. plays a major role. Many European countries monitor selected IIDs within disease surveillance systems. In Switzerland, the information on IIDs is restricted to limited surveillance data, while no data is available for AG. We conducted a qualitative study among Swiss general practitioners (GPs) to investigate the case management of AG and campylobacteriosis patients, the associated disease burden and the determinants leading to registration in the National Notification System for Infectious Diseases (NNSID). Interviews were conducted with a semi-structured questionnaire and underwent inductive content analysis based on Grounded Theory. The questionnaire was repeatedly adapted to capture emerging themes until the point of theoretical saturation. GPs perceived AG and campylobacteriosis of little relevance to their daily work and public health in general. According to GP self-estimates each consults about two cases of AG per week and diagnoses a median of five campylobacteriosis cases per year. A large proportion of AG cases receives telephone consultations only and gets medical advice from the practice nurse. Antibiotic therapy is considered useful and stool diagnostics are performed for about a fifth of consulting AG patients. Stool diagnostics ("test") and antibiotic therapy ("treat") are interrelated and follow four strategies: "Wait & See", "Treat & See", "Treat & Test", and "Test & See". AG case management is diverse and includes different triage steps. A small proportion of AG patients have stool diagnostics performed and only positive tested patients are reported to the NNSID. As a result severe cases and cases with a history of travel abroad are overrepresented in the NNSID. The use of multiplex PCR panels in routine diagnostics likely leads to improved case management and higher case numbers in surveillance systems.

Estimating the Incidence of Acute Infectious Intestinal Disease in the Community in the UK: A Retrospective Telephone Survey

Objectives

To estimate the burden of intestinal infectious disease (IID) in the UK and determine whether disease burden estimations using a retrospective study design differ from those using a prospective study design.

Design/Setting

A retrospective telephone survey undertaken in each of the four countries comprising the United Kingdom. Participants were randomly asked about illness either in the past 7 or 28 days.

Participants

14,813 individuals for all of whom we had a legible recording of their agreement to participate

Outcomes

Self-reported IID, defined as loose stools or clinically significant vomiting lasting less than two weeks, in the absence of a known non-infectious cause.

Results

The rate of self-reported IID varied substantially depending on whether asked for illness in the previous 7 or 28 days. After standardising for age and sex, and adjusting for the number of interviews completed each month and the relative size of each UK country, the estimated rate of IID in the 7-day recall group was 1,530 cases per 1,000 person-years (95% CI: 1135–2113), while in the 28-day recall group it was 533 cases per 1,000 person-years (95% CI: 377–778). There was no significant variation in rates between the four countries. Rates in this study were also higher than in a related prospective study undertaken at the same time.

Conclusions

The estimated burden of disease from IID varied dramatically depending on study design. Retrospective studies of IID give higher estimates of disease burden than prospective studies. Of retrospective studies longer recall periods give lower estimated rates than studies with short recall periods. Caution needs to be exercised when comparing studies of self-reported IID as small changes in study design or case definition can markedly affect estimated rates.