Nationwide Survey for Current Status of Laboratory Diagnosis of Clostridioides difficile Infection in Korea.

BACKGROUND: The interest in Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) has increased, and the choice of assays became wider since the first national survey in Korea on CDI diagnosis in 2015. We conducted a survey of the domestic CDI assays with more varied questions to understand the current situation in Korea. METHODS: In April 2018, about 50 questions on the current status of CDI assays and details on implementation and perceptions were written, and a survey questionnaire was administered to laboratory medicine specialists in 200 institutions. RESULTS: One-hundred and fifty institutions responded to the questionnaire, of which 90 (60.0%) including one commercial laboratory, performed CDI assays. The toxin AB enzyme immunoassay (toxin AB EIA), nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT), and C. difficile culture, glutamate dehydrogenase assay, alone or in combination with other assays, were used in 75 (84.3%), 52 (58.4%), 35 (36.0%), and 23 (25.8%), respectively, and 65 (73.0%) institutions performed a combination of two or more assays. The sensitivity of toxin AB EIA was more negatively perceived, and that on specificity was more positively perceived. The perception of sensitivity and specificity of NAAT was mostly positive. Perception on the algorithm test projected it as useful but in need of countermeasures. Sixty-three (73.3%) institutions responded that they performed surveillance on CDI. CONCLUSION: This study provides useful evidence on the current status of CDI laboratory diagnosis in Korea as well as on items that require improvement and is thought to aid in standardizing and improving the CDI laboratory diagnosis in Korea.

Laboratory Diagnosis of Clostridium difficile Infection in Korea: The First National Survey.

In May 2015, we conducted a voluntary online survey on laboratory diagnostic assays for Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) across clinical microbiology laboratories in Korea. Responses were obtained from 66 laboratories, including 61 hospitals and five commercial laboratories. Among them, nine laboratories reported having not conducted CDI assays. The toxin AB enzyme immunoassay (toxin AB EIA), nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT), and C. difficile culture, alone or in combination with other assays, were used in 51 (89.5%), 37 (64.9%), and 37 (64.9%) of the remaining 57 laboratories, respectively, and 23 (40.4%) of the laboratories performed all three assays. Only one laboratory used the glutamate dehydrogenase assay. Nine laboratories used the toxin AB EIA as a stand-alone assay. The median (range) of examined specimens in one month for the toxin AB EIA, NAAT, and C. difficile culture was 160 (50-2,060), 70 (7-720), and 130 (9-750), respectively. These findings serve as valuable basic data regarding the current status of laboratory diagnosis of CDI in Korea, offering guidance for improved implementation.

Laboratory Diagnosis of Clostridium difficile Infection in Korea: The First National Survey

In May 2015, we conducted a voluntary online survey on laboratory diagnostic assays for Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) across clinical microbiology laboratories in Korea. Responses were obtained from 66 laboratories, including 61 hospitals and five commercial laboratories. Among them, nine laboratories reported having not conducted CDI assays. The toxin AB enzyme immunoassay (toxin AB EIA), nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT), and C. difficile culture, alone or in combination with other assays, were used in 51 (89.5%), 37 (64.9%), and 37 (64.9%) of the remaining 57 laboratories, respectively, and 23 (40.4%) of the laboratories performed all three assays. Only one laboratory used the glutamate dehydrogenase assay. Nine laboratories used the toxin AB EIA as a stand-alone assay. The median (range) of examined specimens in one month for the toxin AB EIA, NAAT, and C. difficile culture was 160 (50–2,060), 70 (7–720), and 130 (9–750), respectively. These findings serve as valuable basic data regarding the current status of laboratory diagnosis of CDI in Korea, offering guidance for improved implementation.