[Identifying gaps between guidelines and clinical practice in Clostridium difficile infection]. / Diferencias entre las recomendaciones y la práctica clínica en la infección por Clostridium difficile.

OBJECTIVES: The first aim was to determine whether patients are being treated in accordance with the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America and the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA/SHEA) Clostridium difficile guidelines and whether adherence impacts patient outcomes. The second aim was to identify specific action items in the guidelines that are not being translated into clinical practice, for their subsequent implementation. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective, descriptive study was conducted over a 36 month period, on patients with compatible clinical symptoms and positive test for C. difficile toxins A and/or B in stool samples, in an internal medicine department of a tertiary medical centre. Patient demographic and clinical data (outcomes, comorbidity, risk factors) and compliance with guidelines, were examined RESULTS: A total of 77 patients with C. difficile infection were identified (87 episodes). Stratified by disease severity criteria, 49.3% of patients were mild-moderate, 35.1% severe, and 15.6% severe-complicated. Full adherence with the guidelines was observed in only 40.2% of patients, and was significantly better for mild-moderate (71.0%), than in severe (7.4%) or severe-complicated patients (16.6%) (P<.003). Adherence was significantly associated with clinical cure (57% vs 42%), fewer recurrences (22.2% vs 77.7%), and mortality (25% vs 75%) (P<.01). The stratification of severity of the episode, and the adequacy of antibiotic to clinical severity, need improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Overall adherence with the guidelines for management of Clostridium difficile infection was poor, especially in severe and severe-complicated patients, being associated with worse clinical outcomes. Educational interventions aimed at improving guideline adherence are warranted.

[Study on the immediate care clinics of the Internal Medicine Department (University Clinic Hospital of Valladolid)]. / Evaluación de las consultas de atención inmediata en Medicina Interna (Hospital Clínico Universitario de Valladolid).

BACKGROUND: Several studies have found a high percentage of inadequate admissions to Internal Medicine Departments. In order to try to alleviate this situation, the Immediate Care Clinics of the Internal Medicine Department (ICCIMD) was created, to study those patients who are suspected of having a serious disease, and whose physical condition allows them to undergo an out-patient study the day after having visited the Emergency Department. The tests requested will take precedence over the rest of the consultations. METHODS: Descriptive, retrospective study, through the review of the clinical records of the patients who came to the ICCIMD during the first two years. RESULTS: Our service admitted 726 people in the ACCIMD, 52.2 % males, average age of 54.12 years old. A total of 18.6 % of the patients required hospital admission; this admission being carried out at the first medical examination in 66.7% of the cases. In most cases, it can be related with shortening a study that would have lasted longer. In spite of this, we consider that 1.4 daily admissions have been avoided. Mean time devoted to this study was about 33.20 days, much greater than that expected, because of the high prevalence of non-specific disease and hospital organization deficit. It was decided to study 76.6% of the patients sent, their diagnosis being achieved in 63.3% of the total number of patients. Nevertheless, the ICCIMD was inadequate, as hospital admission was required or the patient was sent to other specialities in the 27.3% of the cases. CONCLUSIONS: We think that the ACCIMD can be useful to improve efficiency of Internal Medicine Department, although, to do so, the significant problems found must be solved.