English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background  The optimal method for laboratory diagnosis of  Clostridioides difficile  infection (CDI) remains undefined and national guidelines do not make a recommendation for a preferred diagnostic algorithm. Aiming to improve infection control measures, the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania changed its testing process for the diagnosis of CDI from a 3-step to a 2-step algorithm (Figure 1) in September 2018. Starting an algorithm with nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT) has been hypothesized to lead to potential diagnostic uncertainty if the result is positive by NAAT alone, as this test cannot distinguish between active infection and colonization.  Three-Step and Two-Step Diagnostic Testing AlgorithmsMethods  This retrospective, single-center, quasi-experimental study included patients  ≥  18 years of age that tested positive for  C. difficile  between May 1 st , 2018 and January 31 st,  2019. The study period encompassed 4 months prior to the algorithm change, a 1-month washout immediately following the change, and the subsequent 4 months. The primary outcome was proportion of patients who tested positive for  C. difficile  and received targeted treatment for CDI. Secondary outcomes included total number of patients who tested positive for  C. difficile  and received targeted treatment for CDI, duration of treatment for CDI, and hospital length of stay.Results  Sixty-nine patients in the pre-group (3-step) and 75 patients in the post-group (2-step) tested positive for  C. difficile.  A higher proportion of patients in the post-group tested positive by NAAT alone (59.4% vs. 73.3%). CDI severity and prior history of CDI were similar between groups. The primary outcome occurred in 89.9% of patients in the pre-group and 83.8% in the post-group (p=0.213). Sixty-two patients in each group received targeted treatment for CDI (p=0.213), median treatment duration was 15 (IQR 11.25-25.75) and 14 (IQR 11-25) days (p=0.505), and median hospital length of stay was 9 (IQR 3-15) and 6 (IQR 3-20) days (p=0.690) in the pre-group and post-group, respectively.Conclusion  Although there was a higher percentage of patients in the post-group that tested positive for  C. difficile  by NAAT alone, there was no difference in the proportion or total number of patients who received targeted CDI treatment between time periods.Disclosures    All Authors : No reported disclosures

751. Impact of Changing from a Three-step to Two-step Testing Algorithm for the Diagnosis of Clostridioides difficile