search.noResults

search.searching

note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
infection control & hospital epidemiology october 2017, vol. 38, no. 10 concise communication


Antibiotic Overuse is a Major Risk Factor for Clostridium difficile Infection in Surgical Patients


James T. Bernatz, MD;1 Nasia Safdar, MD, PhD;2,3 Scott Hetzel, MS;4 Paul A. Anderson, MD, MS1


Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is associated with increased cost, morbidity, and mortality in postoperative patients. Variable rates of postoperative CDI are reported among 4 surgical specialties during the 30-month study period. Risk factors for CDI include antibiotic use, increased ASA score, and increased admissions in the past year.


Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:1254–1257


Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) following surgical proce- dures is associated with morbidity, mortality, and cost. Length of stay is increased by 1 week if surgery is complicated by a CDI, and mortality has been reported as high as 35% in trauma surgery patients.1,2 Cost of care more than doubles if the postoperative patient contracts CDI.1 Therefore, it is essential to reduce the risk of CDI in surgical patients. Previous studies have reported CDI rates for individual


specialties or after specific procedures with small sample sizes.1,3–7 To our knowledge, there have been no reports of CDI across multiple surgical specialties. Differences across surgical specialties could be due to overall health of the patient population, complexity of surgery, perioperative antibiotic selection, pre- and postoperative exposure to additional anti- biotics, or many other factors. The aims of our study were to determine the incidence of postoperative CDI across four surgical specialties (orthopedic surgery, neurosurgery, trauma surgery, and general surgery) and to examine risk factors for CDI.


methods


This study was conducted at a 592-bed tertiary-care academic center, and we were granted an exemption by the institutional review board. Using the hospital’s quality improvement database, all admissions to 4 hospital units (ie, orthopedic surgery, neurosurgery, trauma surgery, and general surgery) from January 2014 to July 2016 were reviewed. Patients who underwent an inpatient surgical procedure were included. Exclusion criteria included a documented CDI in the 2 months prior to admission or within 72 hours of admission. A case patient was defined as a patient who underwent an inpatient surgical procedure and subsequently developed healthcare-associated CDI (HA-CDI), defined as a positive


PCR for C. difficile toxin gene recorded more than 72 hours after admission and within 12 weeks of discharge. Controls were patients selected from the same group of patients who underwent an inpatient surgical procedure but did not develop HA-CDI. The electronic medical record was used for data extraction. Variables of interest were extracted by a single author.


Statistical Methods


Control patients were matched in triplicate based on age, sex, and admitting department. If more than 3 controls fit the matching criteria for a case, then 3 were chosen at


random. Data analysis included summarizing the cases with means


(±standard deviation [SD]) for normally distributed continuous variables, medians (with interquartile range [IQR]) for nonnormally distributed continuous variables, and frequency (%) for categorical variables. Associations between collected data and subject group were first assessed with univariable mixed-effect logistic regression (MELR) models with matched pair number as a random effect followed by multivariable MELR analyses with a priori defined covariates of body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesio- logists (ASA) classification, and antibiotic use in the previous 6 months. A P value≤.05 was considered significant. R version 3.3 software (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria) was used for statistical analyses.


results Incidence


Over the 30-month study period, there were 11,310 admis- sions to the 4 included hospital units during which the patient had an inpatient operation. In 52 cases, the patient had a positive C. difficile polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test recorded more than 72 hours after admission and within 12 weeks of discharge. The incidence rate of hospital-acquired CDI was 0.80 cases per 1,000 patient days. Comparing spe- cialties, trauma surgery had the highest rate of CDI at 9.5 cases per 1,000 admissions (Table 1).


table 1. Incidence of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) by Hospital Unit


Hospital Unit


Orthopedic surgery 6 Neurosurgery General surgery Trauma surgery


5


30 11


Cases Admissions Ratea OR (95% CI) 4,339


1.4


2,364 3,447 1,160


NOTE. OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval. aCases per 1,000 admissions.


Reference


2.1 1.53 (0.37–6.03) 8.7 6.34 (2.59–18.6) 9.5 6.91 (2.34–22.8)


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144