Brief ReportImplementation of a pilot surveillance program for smaller acute care hospitals
Section snippets
Methods
A theoretic evaluation framework (Table 1) was developed after consultation with the programs key stakeholders and an analysis of the relevant literature.3 For each pilot hospital, this framework was used as a reference to collect information about the program's implementation. Each of the 12 IC nurses who were primarily responsible for the program's implementation was interviewed at least once by the same Victorian Hospital Acquired Infection Surveillance System (VICNISS) Coordinating Centre
Data collection
Fifty percent of the surveillance plans were submitted by the due date. One hospital had planned to participate in the “Surgical Antibiotic Prophylaxis” module, but surgical procedure numbers were unexpectedly low. No hospitals were eligible to participate in the “Surgical Site Infection” module.
All 12 IC nurses agreed that the standard paper data collection forms were “simple to use.” The program's manual was used at least once by 11 of the IC nurses to check reporting instructions. The use of
Discussion
Working closely together during the pilot stage, the VICNISS CC and pilot hospital IC nurses were able to obtain useful information about the implementation of a surveillance program in smaller hospitals. Discrepancies between intended and actual activities in regard to the collection, management, analysis, reporting, and use of the program's data were highlighted. This included, most notably, prospectively case-finding methodology not being uniformly applied; management, analysis, and
References (9)
- et al.
New national surveillance system for hemodialysis-associated infections: initial results
Am J Infect Control
(2002) Hospital epidemiology and infection control in small hospitals
- et al.
The efficacy of infection surveillance and control programs in preventing nosocomial infections in US hospitals
Am J Epidemiol
(1985) - et al.
Recommended practices for surveillance
Am J Infect Control
(1996)
Cited by (2)
A user assessment of a smaller hospital surveillance program
2008, American Journal of Infection ControlCitation Excerpt :Unfortunately, the reasons for the lesser percentages for the other listed “uses” (18.3%-56.5%) were not explored. It may have been that there was insufficient IC allocated time to implement these other uses, or, as previously explained during the pilot stage,4 “no major issues were detected” or “the reports were not statistically meaningful.” It was especially important to assess the educational strategies because the literature describes the many barriers to educating rural nurses and the development of these strategies was resource intensive.7-9
Performance of infection prevention and control programs in small hospitals
2020, Revista da Escola de Enfermagem