Lack of Increased Colonization with Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococci during Preferential Use of Vancomycin for Treatment during an Outbreak of Healthcare-Associated <i>Clostridium difficile</i> Infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess whether use of oral vancomycin for treatment during an outbreak of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) was associated with increased rates of colonization with vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE). DESIGN: A retrospective analysis of hospital databases. SETTING: The Jewish General Hospital in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. METHODS: We collected data regarding VRE colonization and CDI from November 1, 2000, through September 30, 2007, during which policies of preferential oral metronidazole or vancomycin treatment were implemented to control an outbreak of CDI. Four periods were considered: period 1, the preoutbreak period when metronidazole was used; period 2, the CDI outbreak period when metronidazole was used; period 3, the postoutbreak period when vancomycin was used; and period 4, the postoutbreak period when metronidazole was used. RESULTS: A total of 2,412 cases of CDI and 425 cases of VRE colonization were identified. The rate of CDI increased significantly during period 2 and decreased to preoutbreak levels during period 3. The rate of VRE also increased during period 2 and decreased during the first 18 months of period 3. A clonal outbreak of cases of VRE (VanA) colonization was observed toward the end of period 3 and into period 4. Excluding the period of the clonal outbreak, there was a strong correlation between the number of cases of CDI and VRE colonization (r=0.736; P=.001) and a negative association between VRE colonization and vancomycin use (r=-0.765; P=.04). CONCLUSIONS: Increased vancomycin use was not associated with an increase in VRE colonization over a 2-year period. Restriction of vancomycin use during CDI outbreaks because of the fear of increasing VRE colonization may not be warranted.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".