10.25646/2282Dorp, S. M. vanNotermans, D. W.Alblas, J.Gastmeier, PetraMentula, S.Nagy, E.Spigaglia, P.Ivanova, K.Fitzpatrick, F.Barbut, F.Morris, T.Wilcox, M. H.Kinross, P.Suetens, C.Kuijper, Ed J.Weiß, BettinaSurvey of diagnostic and typing capacity for Clostridium difficile infection in Europe, 2011 and 2014Robert Koch-Institut, Infektionsepidemiologie2016diagnosissurveyClostridium difficile Clostridium infections in humanslaboratorytyping610 MedizinRobert Koch-InstitutRobert Koch-Institut2018-05-072018-05-072016-07-272016-07-21enperiodicalParthttp://edoc.rki.de/oa/articles/reRbKyFuwbs2/PDF/23FAjrwulRSs.pdfhttp://edoc.rki.de/176904/2357urn:nbn:de:0257-1004586310.2807/1560-7917.ES.2016.21.29.30292Suboptimal laboratory diagnostics for Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) impedes its surveillance and control across Europe. We evaluated changes in local laboratory CDI diagnostics and changes in national diagnostic and typing capacity for CDI during the European C. difficile Infection Surveillance Network (ECDIS-Net) project, through cross-sectional surveys in 33 European countries in 2011 and 2014. In 2011, 126 (61%) of a convenience sample of 206 laboratories in 31 countries completed a survey on local diagnostics. In 2014, 84 (67%) of these 126 laboratories in 26 countries completed a follow-up survey. Among laboratories that participated in both surveys, use of CDI diagnostics deemed ‘optimal’ or ‘acceptable’ increased from 19% to 46% and from 10% to 15%, respectively (p