2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.cmi.2019.12.011
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Environmental shedding of toxigenic Clostridioides difficile by asymptomatic carriers: A prospective observational study

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
15
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
0
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Several previously published studies identified C difficile in approximately 15% of samples overall and 17%–27% of samples from the patient bathroom [ 12 , 16 , 17 ]. In contrast, Davies et al [ 18 ] and Gilboa et al [ 19 ] identified C difficile in 30%–70% of samples from C difficile patient rooms, and Curry et al [ 20 ] identified C difficile in 5 of 6 colonized patient rooms but not primarily in the bathroom [ 18 , 19 ]. Although differences in recovery rate could be related to patient mix and timing of sampling, we suspect that the sampling technique contributed to these differences.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Several previously published studies identified C difficile in approximately 15% of samples overall and 17%–27% of samples from the patient bathroom [ 12 , 16 , 17 ]. In contrast, Davies et al [ 18 ] and Gilboa et al [ 19 ] identified C difficile in 30%–70% of samples from C difficile patient rooms, and Curry et al [ 20 ] identified C difficile in 5 of 6 colonized patient rooms but not primarily in the bathroom [ 18 , 19 ]. Although differences in recovery rate could be related to patient mix and timing of sampling, we suspect that the sampling technique contributed to these differences.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although differences in recovery rate could be related to patient mix and timing of sampling, we suspect that the sampling technique contributed to these differences. Davies et al [ 18 ], Gilboa et al [ 19 ], and our study used the sponge and stomacher technique, which allows for sampling of a much larger surface area than contact plates or cotton swabs. In addition, Curry et al did not include the bathroom floor as a sample location as our study did, which likely contributed to our difference in findings in the bathroom.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An investigation to compare the burden of environmental shedding of toxigenic C. difficile among asymptomatic carriers, CDI patients and non-carriers in non-epidemic settings showed more than residual contamination in 41% of carrier rooms—24% of these were heavily contaminated. Moreover, multivariate analysis showed that the contamination score of rooms of asymptomatic carriers did not differ from rooms of CDI patients [ 29 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…difficile colonization is more frequent than active disease in the hospital, with a prevalence estimated at 3-26% among adult patients in acute care hospitals [93,94]. Previous studies have suggested that asymptomatic carriers of toxigenic strains could be a potential reservoir for hospital-acquired infections via direct patient-to-patient transmission and hospital environment contamination [95][96][97][98][99][100]. However, the role of asymptomatic carriage as a source of spread in the hospital is controversial and the impact on subsequent development of active disease is not yet fully understood.…”
Section: Asymptomatic Carriage and Potential Disseminationmentioning
confidence: 99%