Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2013 Mar 15.
Published in final edited form as: Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2009 Dec;30(12):1166–1171. doi: 10.1086/648089

Table 2.

Impact changes in sensitivity, specificity, and repeat testing on CDI prevalence, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and perceived CDI burden. All comparisons start with 10,000 inpatients with diarrhea tested for C. difficile. 41% with a negative first test had a second test performed. 53% with a negative second test had a third test performed.

Test Number CDI Prevalence Positive n Negative n False Positive n (%) PPV NPV
Sensitivity = 90.3%, Specificity = 96.2%
First 14.9% 1,669 8,331 323 (19.4) 80.6% 98.3%
Second 1.7% 181 3,232 127 (70.2) 29.6% 99.8%
Third 0.2% 68 1,719 65 (95.6) 4.1% 100.0%
Sensitivity = 75%, Specificity = 96.2%
First 14.9% 1,441 8559 323 (22.4) 77.6% 95.6%
Second 4.4% 242 3265 127 (52.5) 47.3% 98.8%
Third 1.2% 80 1655 65 (81.3) 18.9% 99.7%
Sensitivity = 90.3%, Specificity = 95.0%
First 14.9% 1,771 8,229 426 (24.1) 76.0% 98.2%
Second 1.8% 219 3,371 166 (75.8) 24.4% 99.8%
Third 0.2% 87 1,676 84 (97.7) 3.2% 100.0%

CDI = C. difficile infection, PPV = positive predictive value, NPV = negative predictive value