Book chapters will be unavailable on Saturday 24th August between 8am-12pm BST. This is for essential maintenance which will provide improved performance going forwards. Please accept our apologies for any inconvenience caused.
To send content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure email@example.com
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
To determine whether probiotic prophylaxes reduce the odds of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) in adults and children.
Individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), adjusting for risk factors.
We searched 6 databases and 11 grey literature sources from inception to April 2016. We identified 32 RCTs (n=8,713); among them, 18 RCTs provided IPD (n=6,851 participants) comparing probiotic prophylaxis to placebo or no treatment (standard care). One reviewer prepared the IPD, and 2 reviewers extracted data, rated study quality, and graded evidence quality.
Probiotics reduced CDI odds in the unadjusted model (n=6,645; odds ratio [OR] 0.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.25–0.55) and the adjusted model (n=5,074; OR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.23–0.55). Using 2 or more antibiotics increased the odds of CDI (OR, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.11–4.37), whereas age, sex, hospitalization status, and high-risk antibiotic exposure did not. Adjusted subgroup analyses suggested that, compared to no probiotics, multispecies probiotics were more beneficial than single-species probiotics, as was using probiotics in clinical settings where the CDI risk is ≥5%. Of 18 studies, 14 reported adverse events. In 11 of these 14 studies, the adverse events were retained in the adjusted model. Odds for serious adverse events were similar for both groups in the unadjusted analyses (n=4,990; OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.89–1.26) and adjusted analyses (n=4,718; OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.89–1.28). Missing outcome data for CDI ranged from 0% to 25.8%. Our analyses were robust to a sensitivity analysis for missingness.
Moderate quality (ie, certainty) evidence suggests that probiotic prophylaxis may be a useful and safe CDI prevention strategy, particularly among participants taking 2 or more antibiotics and in hospital settings where the risk of CDI is ≥5%.
The impact of anxiety disorders has not been well delineated in prospective studies of bipolar disorder.
To examine the association between anxiety and course of bipolar disorder, as defined by mood episodes, quality of life and role functioning.
A thousand out-patients with bipolar disorder were followed prospectively for 1 year.
A current comorbid anxiety disorder (present in 31.9% of participants) was associated with fewer days well, a lower likelihood of timely recovery from depression, risk of earlier relapse, lower quality of life and diminished role function over 1 year of prospective study. The negative impact was greater with multiple anxiety disorders.
Anxiety disorders, including those present during relative euthymia, predicted a poorer bipolar course. The detrimental effects of anxiety were not simply a feature of mood state. Treatment studies targeting anxiety disorders will help to clarify the nature of the impact of anxiety on bipolar course.
In 2002, the Chicago Department of Public Health (CDPH; Chicago, Illinois) convened the Chicago-Area Neonatal MRSA Working Group (CANMWG) to discuss and compare approaches aimed at control of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs). To better understand these issues on a regional level, the CDPH and the Evanston Department of Health and Human Services (EDHHS; Evanston, Illinois) began an investigation.
Survey to collect demographic, clinical, microbiologic, and epidemiologic data on individual cases and clusters of MRSA infection; an additional survey collected data on infection control practices.
Level III NICUs at Chicago-area hospitals.
Neonates and healthcare workers associated with the level III NICUs.
From June 2001 through September 2002, the participating hospitals reported all clusters of MRSA infection in their respective level III NICUs to the CDPH and the EDHHS.
Thirteen clusters of MRSA infection were detected in level III NICUs, and 149 MRSA-positive infants were reported. Infection control surveys showed that hospitals took different approaches for controlling MRSA colonization and infection in NICUs.
The CANMWG developed recommendations for the prevention and control of MRSA colonization and infection in the NICU and agreed that recommendations should expand to include future data generated by further studies. Continuing partnerships between hospital infection control personnel and public health professionals will be crucial in honing appropriate guidelines for effective approaches to the management and control of MRSA colonization and infection in NICUs.