4.7 Article

Outcomes associated with recent guideline recommendations removing metronidazole for treatment of non-severe Clostridioides difficile infection: a retrospective, observational, nationwide cohort study

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2021.106282

关键词

Clostridioides difficile infection; Metronidazole; Vancomycin

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aimed to investigate if moving away from metronidazole improved clinical outcomes of initial non-severe CDI episodes, but the conclusion showed that this change did not improve the composite of treatment failure or recurrence.
Objectives: The 2017 Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA) and Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) Clinical Practice Guidelines for Clostridioides difficile ( C. difficile) infection (CDI) removed metronidazole as a preferred option for initial episodes of non-severe CDI. This study aimed to determine if the shift away from metronidazole improved clinical outcomes of initial episodes of non severe CDI. Methods: The study was a retrospective, observational, nationwide cohort study using a Veterans Health Administration national clinical administrative database. Adult patients treated for non-severe CDI before and after the February 2018 publication of the 2017 IDSA/SHEA C. difficile Clinical Practice Guidelines were included. The primary outcome was the composite of treatment failure or probable recurrence. Results: A total of 3608 patients were included, with 1809 in the pre-guideline cohort (mean [SD] age, 65.5 [14.2] years; 1602 [88.6%] male) and 1799 in the post-guideline cohort (mean [SD] age, 64 [14.6] years; 1584 [88%] male). Overall composite of treatment failure or probable recurrence was similar between both cohorts (318 of 1809 [17.6%] pre-guideline cohort vs. 317 of 1799 [17.6%] post-guideline cohort [ P = 0.97]). Conclusion: The shift away from metronidazole as a preferred option in initial non-severe Clostridioides difficile infection did not improve the composite of treatment failure or recurrence. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据