Transcultural adaptation and validation of the Celiac Dietary Adherence Test: a simple questionnaire to measure adherence to a gluten-free diet

Background and aims: A gluten-free diet is to date the only treatment available to celiac disease sufferers. However, systematic reviews indicate that, depending on the method of evaluation used, only 42% to 91% of patients adhere to the diet strictly. Transculturally adapted tools that evaluate adherence beyond simple self-informed questions or invasive analyses are, therefore, of importance. The aim is to obtain a Spanish transcultural adaption and validation of Leffler's Celiac Dietary Adherence Test. Methods: A two-stage observational transversal study: translation and back translation by four qualified translators followed by a validation stage in which the questionnaire was administered to 306 celiac disease patients aged between 12 and 72 years and resident in Aragon. Factorial structure, criteria validity and internal consistency were evaluated. Results: The Spanish version maintained the 7 items in a 3-factor structure. Feasibility was very high in all the questions answered and the floor and ceiling effects were very low (4.3% and 1%, respectively). The Spearman correlation with the self-efficacy and life quality scales and the self-informed question were statistically significant (p < 0.01). According to the questionnaire criteria, adherence was 72.3%. Conclusion: The Spanish version of the Celiac Dietary Adherence Test shows appropriate psychometric properties and is, therefore, suitable for studying adherence to a gluten-free diet in clinical and research environments.

Characteristics of Clostridium difficile infection in patients with discordant diagnostic test results

Background: Clinical features of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) cases diagnosed by detection of polymerase chain reaction (PCR), with negative toxin enzyme immunoassay results (EIA) have not been fully elucidated. The purpose of this study was to determine the magnitude of CDI patients who had negative EIA toxin determinations but positive PCR tests, and their differences in clinical presentation. Methods: We performed a retrospective study comparing the clinical features of CDI cases detected by EIA (toxins A + B) with cases detected by PCR (toxin negative, PCR positive) over a 16-month period. Only patients with an initial Clostridium difficile infection episode that fulfilled a standardized definition were included. Results: During the study period, 107 episodes of CDI were detected. Seventy-four patients (69%) had positive glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) antigen and EIA determinations (EIA positive patients). Thirty-three patients (31%) had GDH positive, negative toxin EIA and positive PCR determination (PCR positive patients). PCR positive patients were younger, 57 (27) years (mean [SD]), than EIA positive patients, 71 (16) years, (p < 0.001). Fewer PCR positive patients were receiving proton pump inhibitors (21 patients, 64%) than EIA positive patients (61 patients, 82%, p = 0.034). The clinical presentation was similar in both groups. In the multivariate analysis, lower age was identified as the only independent variable associated with PCR positive patients. Conclusions: One third of Clostridium difficile infection patients present negative toxin EIA and PCR positive tests. Performing PCR determination after the negative EIA test is more relevant in younger patients.