Logo image
Hospital epidemiologists' and infection preventionists' opinions regarding hospital-onset bacteremia and fungemia as a potential healthcare-associated infection metric
Journal article   Peer reviewed

Hospital epidemiologists' and infection preventionists' opinions regarding hospital-onset bacteremia and fungemia as a potential healthcare-associated infection metric

Raymund B Dantes, Lilian M Abbo, Deverick Anderson, Lisa Hall, Jennifer H Han, Anthony D Harris, Surbhi Leekha, Aaron M Milstone, Daniel J Morgan, Nasia Safdar, …
Infection control and hospital epidemiology, Vol.40(5), pp.536-540
05/2019
DOI: 10.1017/ice.2019.40
PMCID: PMC6897303
PMID: 30932802
url
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/6897303View
Open Access

Abstract

To ascertain opinions regarding etiology and preventability of hospital-onset bacteremia and fungemia (HOB) and perspectives on HOB as a potential outcome measure reflecting quality of infection prevention and hospital care. Cross-sectional survey. Hospital epidemiologists and infection preventionist members of the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA) Research Network. A web-based, multiple-choice survey was administered via the SHEA Research Network to 133 hospitals. A total of 89 surveys were completed (67% response rate). Overall, 60% of respondents defined HOB as a positive blood culture on or after hospital day 3. Central line-associated bloodstream infections and intra-abdominal infections were perceived as the most frequent etiologies. Moreover, 61% thought that most HOB events are preventable, and 54% viewed HOB as a measure reflecting a hospital's quality of care. Also, 29% of respondents' hospitals already collect HOB data for internal purposes. Given a choice to publicly report central-line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) and/or HOB, 57% favored reporting either HOB alone (22%) or in addition to CLABSI (35%) and 34% favored CLABSI alone. Among the majority of SHEA Research Network respondents, HOB is perceived as preventable, reflective of quality of care, and potentially acceptable as a publicly reported quality metric. Further studies on HOB are needed, including validation as a quality measure, assessment of risk adjustment, and formation of evidence-based bundles and toolkits to facilitate measurement and improvement of HOB rates.
Infection Control Practitioners - psychology Cross-Sectional Studies Humans Bacteremia - psychology Fungemia - prevention & control Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice Cross Infection - psychology Bacteremia - prevention & control Hospitals Cross Infection - microbiology Surveys and Questionnaires Epidemiologists - psychology Fungemia - psychology Quality of Health Care

Details

Metrics

Logo image