Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T13:13:13.162Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Necessary but Not Sufficient: A Comparison of Surveillance Definitions of Clostridium difficile–Associated Diarrhea

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Thomas G. Fraser ,
Cynthia Fatica  and
Steven M. Gordon
Thomas G. Fraser*
Affiliation:
Cleveland Clinic, Department of Infectious Disease, Cleveland, Ohio Quality andPatient Safety Institute, Cleveland, Ohio
Cynthia Fatica
Affiliation:
Quality andPatient Safety Institute, Cleveland, Ohio
Steven M. Gordon
Affiliation:
Cleveland Clinic, Department of Infectious Disease, Cleveland, Ohio
*
Department of Infectious Disease/S32, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44195 (frasert@ccf.org)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this article, we describe our comparison of the Cleveland Clinic surveillance definition of Clostridium difficile–associated diarrhe and the definition mandated by the Ohio Department of Health. We found the definitions to be concordant only 71% of the time; the Ohio Department of Health definition identified 278 of the 391 cases identified by the Cleveland Clinic definition. Surveillance definitions mandated by the Ohio Department of Health overrepresented the number of cases attributable to nosocomial transmission at our institution.

Type
Concise Communication
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 30 , Issue 4 , April 2009 , pp. 377 - 379
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Spector, H. “Glad to be here, but resentful.” The Plain Dealer (Cleveland, Ohio), November 6, 2005.Google Scholar
2.Kutty, PK, Benoit, SR, Woods, CW, et al.Assessment of Clostridium difficile–associated disease surveillance definitions, North Carolina, 2005. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2008;29:197–202.Google Scholar
3.Chang, HT, Krezolek, D, Johnson, S, Parada, JP, Evans, CT, Gerding, DN. Onset of symptoms and time to diagnosis of Clostridium difficile–associated disease following discharge from an acute care hospital. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2007;28:926–931.Google Scholar
4.Sohn, S, Climo, M, Diekema, D, et al.Varying rates of Clostridium difficile associated diarrhea at prevention epicenter hospitals. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2005;26:676–679.Google Scholar
5.McDonald, LC, Coignard, B, Dubberke, E, Song, X, Horan, T, Kutty, PK. Recommendations for surveillance of Clostridium difficile–associated disease. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2007;28:140–145.Google Scholar
6.Desphande, A, Fraser, TG, Jain, A, et al.Colectomy in Clostridium difficile associated disease: the Cleveland Clinic Experience. In: Program and abstracts of the 17th Annual Scientific Meeting of the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America; April 14–17, 2007; Baltimore, Maryland. Abstract 176.Google Scholar
7.Gerding, DN. New definitions will help, but cultures are critical for resolving unanswered questions about Clostridium difficile. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2007;28:113–115.Google Scholar
8. Ohio Department of Health. Final report for rates of Clostridium difficile for Ohio hospitals and nursing homes January–December 2006. Available at: http://www.odh.ohio.gov/alerts/cdiffl.aspx. Accessed: March 7, 2007.Google Scholar
9.The Quality Indicator Study Group. An approach to the evaluation of quality indicators of the outcome of care in hospitalized patients, with a focus on nosocomial infection indicators. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1995;16:308–316.Google Scholar
10.Wong, ES, Rupp, ME, Mermel, L, et al.Public disclosure of healthcare-associated infections: the role of the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2005;26:210–212.Google Scholar