Narrow Results Clear All
Search results for "Nosocomial Infections"
Journal Article > Study
Magill SS, O'Leary E, Janelle SJ, et al; Emerging Infections Program Hospital Prevalence Survey Team. N Engl J Med. 2018;379:1732-1744.
Health care–associated infections (HAIs) are a key cause of preventable harm in hospitals. Successful programs to avert HAIs include the comprehensive unit-based safety program to reduce catheter-related bloodstream infections and the AHRQ Safety Program for Surgery to prevent surgical site infections. This survey of 12,299 patients at 199 hospitals on a single day enabled researchers to estimate the prevalence of HAIs in the United States. In 2015, 3.2% of hospitalized patients experienced an HAI, a 16% decrease compared to a similarly derived estimate in 2011. The most common HAIs were pneumonia and Clostridium difficile infections, while the biggest reductions were in urinary tract and surgical site infections. This data emphasizes the importance of identifying strategies to combat pneumonia in nonventilated patients, which remains common and less well-studied than other HAIs. A past PSNet perspective discussed the history around efforts to address preventable HAIs, including federal initiatives.
Journal Article > Study
One needle, one syringe, only one time? A survey of physician and nurse knowledge, attitudes, and practices around injection safety.
Kossover-Smith RA, Coutts K, Hatfield KM, et al. Am J Infect Control. 2017;45:1018-1023.
Unsafe injection practices in health care settings have led to more than 50 disease outbreaks in the past 20 years. In this cross-sectional, voluntary survey across 8 states, 12% of responding physicians stated that needles were reused between patients in their workplace. Nearly 8% of physicians thought this was an acceptable practice. The authors discuss implications for the Center for Disease Control and Prevention's One & Only safe injection campaign.
Herzer K, Seshamani M. HealthReform.Gov. July 2009.
National Scorecard on Rates of Hospital-Acquired Conditions 2010 to 2015: Interim Data From National Efforts to Make Health Care Safer.
Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; December 2016.
Medicare nonpayment and reporting requirements have stimulated health care organizations to focus on reducing hospital-acquired conditions (HACs) such as health care–associated infections and never events. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality regularly tracks HAC rates, including rates of adverse drug events, catheter-associated urinary tract infections, central line–associated bloodstream infections, falls, obstetric adverse events, pressure ulcers, surgical site infections, ventilator-associated pneumonias, and postoperative venous thromboembolisms. According to data from the AHRQ National Scorecard, HACs have decreased by 21% between 2010 and 2015. This represents a total of 3.1 million fewer HACs contracted by hospitalized patients over 5 years, saving an estimated 125,000 lives and $28 billion. These findings represent substantial progress and support the success of incentives designed to eliminate HACs as a source of patient harm.
Shojania KG, Duncan BW, McDonald KM, Wachter RM, eds. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2001. AHRQ Publication No. 01-E058.
Most evidence reports are placed on shelves and gather dust. This one, which reviewed the state of the evidence behind nearly 80 different safety practices (including computerized order entry, use of pharmacists on rounds, methods to prevent falls and nosocomial infections, and interventions to create a culture of safety), became quite influential, in part because it was the first effort to subject safety practices to the same scrutiny as other clinical practices in terms of their evidence of effectiveness. Nearly 100,000 copies of the report have been obtained from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and its now-famous list of the top 11 practices became the focus of many a new patient safety program at hospitals around the nation. The report served as one of the intellectual underpinnings of subsequent rankings of practices such as those by the National Quality Forum and the Leapfrog Group. It also engendered a spirited debate between those who advocated a practical approach to the adoption of safety practices and those promoting a more evidence-based approach. Readers are cautioned that evidence reports have limited shelf-lives, and it is worth reviewing recent literature before adopting even the most highly rated practices in this report.