The infection control practitioner: an action plan for the 1990s

Whither infectious diseases consultations? Analysis of 14,005 consultations from a 5-year period

During a 5-year period, data from all infectious disease (ID) consultations were recorded in a computerized database, which included 9068 new and 4937 additional consultations. The purpose of these 14,005 consultations was therapy (for 58%), diagnosis (for 13%), both (for 24%), and prophylaxis (for 4%); 51% were performed at the bedside, and the remainder were by discussion (19%) or telephone (30%). Recommendations included the following: initiation, change, or discontinuation of antibiotics (in 46%); performance of diagnostic tests (in 20%) or surgical procedures (in 1%); prophylaxis (in 3%); or no change (in 29%). Analysis of new versus additional consultations revealed significant differences. A new ID consultation was given at a rate of 6.0 consultations per 100 hospitalized patients; the rate per department correlated with the expenditure on antimicrobials per patient admission. During the study period, expenditure on antimicrobials per admission steadily decreased, from $44 in 1995 to $30 in 1999, a 35% reduction. In conclusion, analysis of data from ID consultations enables the ID service to evaluate its activity and to direct efforts to departments with high rates of nosocomial infections, antimicrobial resistance, and/or antimicrobial use.

Variation in administrators' and clinicians' attitudes toward critical elements of an infection control program and the role of the infection control practitioner in New South Wales, Australia

BACKGROUND

Debate remains over the core activities of infection control (IC) programs. Differences in stakeholder opinions must be considered if consensus panel guidelines and recommendations are to be broadly applied. This article describes a survey of administrators and clinicians employed in hospitals in New South Wales, Australia. Respondents self-reported their levels of agreement with affirmative statements regarding the role of the infection control practitioner (ICP) and the essential requirements and infrastructure of IC programs.

METHOD

The study population included administrators and clinicians in each public, private, and freestanding day hospital in New South Wales. Respondents reported the intensity of their agreement with 16 affirmative statements relating to IC program infrastructure and resources and the ICP's role and responsibilities.

RESULTS

The overall response rate was 62.1% (587/945). Clinicians (349/587) and administrators (238/587) accounted for 59.5% and 40.5% of the response rate, respectively. Overall, administrators and clinicians reported greatest levels of agreement for those elements not requiring additional resources.

CONCLUSION

The extent of divergence between administrators and clinicians is not so great that it can not be resolved. Our findings demonstrate the degree of administrator support that clinicians can expect for each element. We advocate better communication between clinicians and administrators in conjunction with objective strategic planning. Our findings provide a guide for ICPs to either establish or negotiate the core components of their IC program.

The fifth evolutionary era in infection control: interventional epidemiology

A historical review of infection control over the last 4 decades indicates that the field has evolved from being one whose investigative work laid the foundation for understanding the chain of infection to an influential profession whose research on effective prevention methods have revoluntionized clinical practice throughout the world. Underlying our successes is the fact that growth in the profession has brought with it an enormous expansion in responsibilities, which in turn has impacted, in some cases severely, the personnel and time resources of infection control departments. At the same time, the economic pressures brought on by the upheavals in the business of health care have trickled down wherein it now influences the makeup and effectiveness of infection control programs. To continue with our mission of reducing morbidity and mortality, and perhaps to avoid a diminishing of our own professional influence, it will become essential that new approaches to the management of infection control programs be implemented. The approach must start by incorporating a basic mandate for change in the infection control professional.

Methodologies used in surveillance of surgical wound infections and bacteremia in Australian hospitals

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of nosocomial infection in Australian hospitals is estimated to be between 5.5% and 6.3%. Since 1989, infection control professionals (ICPs) in hospitals accredited by the Australian Council on Health Care Standards (ACHS) have been encouraged to collect nosocomial infection data according to ACHS methodology.

METHOD

In 1996, we surveyed members of the Australian Infection Control Association to examine the time spent on surveillance, the practice of surveillance of all hospital infections (hospital-wide surveillance), case-finding methods, case definitions, and reporting routinely used by ICPs in acute care hospitals. We also examined the ICPs' education and experience in infection control (IC).

RESULTS

The survey was completed and returned by 65% (644 of 993) of Australian Infection Control Association members. Of the ICPs who completed the survey, 47.8% (308 of 644; 95% CI, 43.9%-51.7%) met the criteria for inclusion, because they coordinated an IC program in an acute care or surgical hospital and performed surveillance for either surgical wound infection, intravascular device-related bacteremia, or non-device-related bacteremia. Of the ICPs who reported their facility's accreditation status, 93.5% participated in ACHS system. Most (97.6%) ICPs had completed hospital-based general registered nurse training. Only 1.9% (6 of 308) of ICPs reported completion of continuing education relating to hospital epidemiology. The number of years of IC experience ranged from zero to 35 years, with a median of 4 years. ICPs spent a substantial proportion of their total weekly IC time on surveillance irrespective of ACHS accreditation; 19.5 hours in ACHS hospitals and 15.6 hours in non-ACHS hospitals (P =.33). More than three quarters (76.0%) of ICPs performed hospital-wide surveillance. The case-finding methods, definitions of infections, and reporting formats varied greatly. The definition most commonly applied by ICPs (6.8%; 95% CI, 4.1%-10.4%) to define surgical wound infection was infection within 30 days after the operative procedure, plus purulent drainage, plus isolation of organisms from a culture from the incision site, plus diagnosis by a medical officer. A 5-item definition of a patient being asymptomatic, plus afebrile on admission, plus infection occurring at least 48 hours after admission, plus the patient having a fever of >38 degrees C, plus a recognized culture from one or more bottles was used by 15.7% (95% CI, 11.3%-21.0%) of ICPs to define a case of bacteremia.

CONCLUSION

Surveillance is the core business of Australian ICPs and consumes a substantial proportion of their time. The importance of surveillance, the epidemiologic limitations of the current ACHS system, and the nonstandard methods we report indicate that improved methodology is required for case finding and reporting of nosocomial infections. Australian ICPs should complete training in the principles of surveillance and epidemiology. With this training, ICPs can work collaboratively with other health care professionals to develop epidemiologically sound, local, nosocomial surveillance systems and lobby for a voluntary, national, standardized, risk-adjusted system of targeted nosocomial surveillance.

Analysis and impact of infectious disease consultations in a general hospital

During an 18-month period, data from all patients in whose care our infectious diseases (ID) service was involved, were recorded in a computerized database. A total of 4184 new consultations was recorded. The consultations were solicited by the patients' physicians in 3326 cases (80%) and initiated by the ID service in the remainder. The purpose of the consultations was diagnosis (14%), therapy (39%), both diagnosis and therapy (40%), and prophylaxis (6%). Two thousand and ninety-four consultations (50%) were performed at the bedside, and the others by personal or telephone discussion. ID consultation was given in more than 10% of admitted patients in six departments, 46% of the admissions in the ICU, and 6.9/100 hospitalized patients. Recommendations included: antibiotic manipulation (i.e., initiation, change or discontinuation of antibiotic treatment) (51%); performance of tests (13%); performance of diagnostic or therapeutic procedures (5%); prophylaxis (4%) or no change in management (26%). Analysis of the solicited vs unsolicited consultations and of the bedside vs telephone consultations revealed that sub-groups of consultations differ significantly from each other in many aspects. Recording of consultations enables the ID service to evaluate its activity and to direct efforts to departments with high rates of infectious diseases and/or antimicrobial usage.

Establishing an infection control structure

In studies from the USA it has been shown that infection control can lower infection rates by 30%. To achieve this an infection control programme has to be given a firm structure. Judging from the opinions presented by an educational workshop within the International Federation of Infection Control (IFIC) and from the literature there is an international consensus on the basic components of hospital infection control. An infection control team, with the task of identifying areas of concern, providing or initiating work on written policies, educating and advising not only medical staff but also hospital administrators, constructors etc., constitutes the backbone of infection control. However, in most countries the infection control team, should it exist, is usually understaffed. This is false economy, a qualified medical input is a proven investment.

Contemporary challenges for hospital epidemiology

According to conventional wisdom, it is time for hospital epidemiologists to look beyond traditional infection control responsibilities and to shoulder an "expanded role," including quality assurance, risk management, and pharmacoepidemiology. Some see this as a matter of survival as the profession reacts to potent external forces that seek to curb the cost of health care while assuring quality service. Infection control specialists, it is argued, have the epidemiologic skills to measure adverse outcomes of hospitalization, adjust for confounding variables, and evaluate the impact of targeted interventions. Before embracing these new responsibilities, however, it should be noted that many hospital epidemiologists would require additional training in basic epidemiologic principles. Although hospital epidemiologists may seek a leadership role in hospital quality assurance and health policy research, they have generally not been innovators in these fields, even in some specific areas relevant to infection control. For example, while hospital epidemiologists have begun to consider severity of illness as a potential confounder in epidemiologic analyses, they have not participated in the development or validation of any of the most widely used indicators. For those hospital epidemiologists who wish to capitalize on their traditional background in infectious diseases, contemporary infection control provides numerous challenges. For example, the epidemiology of many common nosocomial infections, such as bacterial pneumonia in immunocompromised hosts, remains to be defined. Hospital epidemiologists need to incorporate a variety of sophisticated microbiologic methods into their practice to help them trace the spread of nosocomial pathogens. Finally, they should collaborate more closely with clinical and bench investigators in a number of areas, including microbial pathogenesis, immunology, and biotechnology.