[Identifying gaps between guidelines and clinical practice in Clostridium difficile infection]

OBJECTIVES

The first aim was to determine whether patients are being treated in accordance with the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America and the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA/SHEA) Clostridium difficile guidelines and whether adherence impacts patient outcomes. The second aim was to identify specific action items in the guidelines that are not being translated into clinical practice, for their subsequent implementation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective, descriptive study was conducted over a 36 month period, on patients with compatible clinical symptoms and positive test for C. difficile toxins A and/or B in stool samples, in an internal medicine department of a tertiary medical centre. Patient demographic and clinical data (outcomes, comorbidity, risk factors) and compliance with guidelines, were examined

RESULTS

A total of 77 patients with C. difficile infection were identified (87 episodes). Stratified by disease severity criteria, 49.3% of patients were mild-moderate, 35.1% severe, and 15.6% severe-complicated. Full adherence with the guidelines was observed in only 40.2% of patients, and was significantly better for mild-moderate (71.0%), than in severe (7.4%) or severe-complicated patients (16.6%) (P<.003). Adherence was significantly associated with clinical cure (57% vs 42%), fewer recurrences (22.2% vs 77.7%), and mortality (25% vs 75%) (P<.01). The stratification of severity of the episode, and the adequacy of antibiotic to clinical severity, need improvement.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall adherence with the guidelines for management of Clostridium difficile infection was poor, especially in severe and severe-complicated patients, being associated with worse clinical outcomes. Educational interventions aimed at improving guideline adherence are warranted.

Transmission of HIV Drug Resistance and the Predicted Effect on Current First-line Regimens in Europe

Transmitted human immunodeficiency virus drug resistance in Europe is stable at around 8%. The impact of baseline mutation patterns on susceptibility to antiretroviral drugs should be addressed using clinical guidelines. The impact on baseline susceptibility is largest for nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors.

Background. Numerous studies have shown that baseline drug resistance patterns may influence the outcome of antiretroviral therapy. Therefore, guidelines recommend drug resistance testing to guide the choice of initial regimen. In addition to optimizing individual patient management, these baseline resistance data enable transmitted drug resistance (TDR) to be surveyed for public health purposes. The SPREAD program systematically collects data to gain insight into TDR occurring in Europe since 2001.

Methods. Demographic, clinical, and virological data from 4140 antiretroviral-naive human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)–infected individuals from 26 countries who were newly diagnosed between 2008 and 2010 were analyzed. Evidence of TDR was defined using the WHO list for surveillance of drug resistance mutations. Prevalence of TDR was assessed over time by comparing the results to SPREAD data from 2002 to 2007. Baseline susceptibility to antiretroviral drugs was predicted using the Stanford HIVdb program version 7.0.

Results. The overall prevalence of TDR did not change significantly over time and was 8.3% (95% confidence interval, 7.2%–9.5%) in 2008–2010. The most frequent indicators of TDR were nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI) mutations (4.5%), followed by nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) mutations (2.9%) and protease inhibitor mutations (2.0%). Baseline mutations were most predictive of reduced susceptibility to initial NNRTI-based regimens: 4.5% and 6.5% of patient isolates were predicted to have resistance to regimens containing efavirenz or rilpivirine, respectively, independent of current NRTI backbones.

Conclusions. Although TDR was highest for NRTIs, the impact of baseline drug resistance patterns on susceptibility was largest for NNRTIs. The prevalence of TDR assessed by epidemiological surveys does not clearly indicate to what degree susceptibility to different drug classes is affected.