Methods for producing a national infection prevention and control manual (NIPCM) in Scotland.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Ritchie L
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7195071 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Methods for producing a national infection prevention and control manual (NIPCM) in Scotland.
Ritchie Lisa L Boswell Catherine C McIntyre Jackie J Macdonald Laura L
Infection prevention in practice 20200408 2
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThe devolution of health to Scotland in 1999, led for the first time in the NHS, to different priorities and success indicators for infection prevention and control (IPC). This project sought to understand, compare and evaluate the national IPC priorities and available indicators of success.AimTo identify the national IPC priorities alongside national indicators of success.MethodsCritical analysis of nationally produced documents and publicly available infection-related data up to March 2018.FindingsFor both NHS Scotland and England the local and national IPC priorities are evidenced by: (1) people being cared for in an IPC-safe environment; (2) staff following IPC-safe procedures; and (3) organisations continuously striving not just to attain standards, but to improve on them. If national agencies that produce data were also charged with using a Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) model, then there would be further opportunities to detect and improve on successes.
| S-EPMC8014007 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundEffective infection prevention and control (IPC) programmes comprise a hierarchy of preventive measures, one of which is appropriate use of personal protective equipment (PPE). A poor understanding of the role of PPE and sub-optimal use may fail to prevent or even increase pathogen transmission during routine care or an infectious disease outbreak. Variability in delivery and content of IPC and PPE education and training across organisations can lead to confusion, unsafe practice, and lack of confidence among clinicians. In a national survey we explored the perspectives of Australian and New Zealand IPC professionals on the value and feasibility of a national IPC training and monitoring programme to improve and standardise PPE practice and raise the profile of IPC.MethodsA population-based online survey that examined hospital PPE training programmes was distributed to members of three major Australasian organisations representing IPC professionals. Quantitative results of the survey have been reported previously. This paper is a qualitative analysis of responses to two open-ended questions about a national approach to training in IPC and the use of PPE.ResultsMost respondents agreed that standardising IPC and PPE training could achieve more consistent practice nationally, supported through the provision of educational resources. Including competency in the use of PPE in mandatory IPC standards would assist in improving the practice and raising the profile of IPC more generally.ConclusionThe results of this study suggest that that there is support for national programmes and standards for use of PPE in Australia and New Zealand.
| S-EPMC7816900 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHealthcare-associated infection (HAI) is a common and largely preventable cause of morbidity and mortality. The COVID-19 pandemic has presented unprecedented challenges to health systems. We conducted a national survey to ascertain hospital characteristics and the use of HAI prevention measures in Israel.MethodsWe e-mailed surveys to infection prevention and control (IPC) leads of acute care hospitals in Israel. The survey included questions about the use of practices to prevent catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI), central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI), ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), and Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI). The survey also assessed COVID-19 impact and healthcare worker well-being.ResultsIPC leads from 15 of 24 invited hospitals (63%) completed the survey. Only one-third of respondents reported strong support for IPC from hospital leadership. Although several prevention practices were used by all hospitals (e.g., maximum sterile barrier precautions for CLABSI and real-time assessment of environmental cleaning for CDI), use of other practices was suboptimal-particularly for CAUTI and VAP. COVID-19 had a profound impact on Israeli hospitals, with all hospitals reporting opening of new units to care for COVID patients and most reporting moderate to extreme financial hardship. All hospitals reported highly successful plans to vaccinate all staff and felt confident that the vaccine is safe and effective.ConclusionWe provide a status report of the IPC characteristics and practices Israeli hospitals are currently using to prevent HAIs during the COVID-19 era. While many globally accepted IPC practices are widely implemented, opportunities to increase the use of certain IPC practices in Israeli hospitals exist.
| S-EPMC9482296 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe objectives of this study were to (1) obtain a national perspective of the current state of nursing home (NH) infection prevention and control (IPC) programs and (2) examine differences in IPC program characteristics for NHs that had and had not received an infection control deficiency citation.DesignA national cross-sectional survey of randomly sampled NHs was conducted and responses were linked with Certification and Survey Provider Enhanced Reporting (CASPER) and NH Compare data.SettingSurveys were completed and returned by 990 NHs (response rate 39%) between December 2013 and December 2014.ParticipantsThe person in charge of the IPC program at each NH completed the survey.MeasurementsThe survey consisted of 34 items related to respondent demographics, IPC program staffing, stability of the workforce, resources and challenges, and resident care and employee processes. Facility characteristics and infection control deficiency citations were assessed using CASPER and NH Compare data.ResultsMost respondents had at least 2 responsibilities in addition to those related to infection control (54%) and had no specific IPC training (61%). Although many practices and processes were consistent with infection prevention guidelines for NHs, there was wide variation in programs across the United States. Approximately 36% of responding facilities had received an infection control deficiency citation. NHs that received citations had infection control professionals with less experience (P = .01) and training (P = .02) and were less likely to provide financial resources for continuing education in infection control (P = .01).ConclusionThe findings demonstrate that a lack of adequately trained infection prevention personnel is an important area for improvement. Furthermore, there is a need to identify specific evidence-based practices to reduce infection risk in NHs.
| S-EPMC4696513 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHealthcare-associated infections (HAI) pose a burden on healthcare providers worldwide. To prevent HAI and strengthen infection prevention and control (IPC) structures, the WHO has developed a variety of tools and guidelines. Recently, the WHO released the Infection Prevention and Control Assessment Framework (IPCAF), a questionnaire-like tool designed for assessing IPC structures at the facility level. The IPCAF reflects the eight WHO core components of IPC. Data on the implementation of IPC measures in German hospitals are scarce. Therefore, it was our objective to utilize the IPCAF in order to gather information on the current state of IPC implementation in German hospitals, as well as to promote the IPCAF to a broad audience.MethodsThe National Reference Center for Surveillance of Nosocomial Infections (NRZ) sent a translated version of the IPCAF to 1472 acute care hospitals in Germany. Data entry and transfer to the NRZ was done electronically between October and December 2018. The IPCAF was conceived in a way that depending on the selected answers a score was calculated, with 0 being the lowest possible and 800 the highest possible score. Depending on the overall score, the IPCAF allocated hospitals to four different "IPC levels": inadequate, basic, intermediate, and advanced.ResultsA total of 736 hospitals provided a complete dataset and were included in the data analysis. The overall median score of all hospitals was 690, which corresponded to an advanced level of IPC. Only three hospitals (0.4%) fell into the category "basic", with 111 hospitals (15.1%) being "intermediate" and 622 hospitals (84.5%) being "advanced". In no case was the category "inadequate" allocated. More profound differences were found between the respective core components. Components on multimodal strategies and workload, staffing, ward design and bed occupancy revealed the lowest scores.ConclusionsIPC key aspects in general are well established in Germany. Potentials for improvement were identified particularly with regard to workload and staffing. Insufficient implementation of multimodal strategies was found to be another relevant deficit. Our survey represents a successful attempt at promoting the IPCAF and encouraging hospitals to utilize WHO tools for self-assessment.
| S-EPMC6505265 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWHO infection prevention and control (IPC) minimum requirements provide standards to reduce the risk of infection during health-care delivery. We aimed to investigate the global implementation of these requirements at national levels and the progress of doing so across 2021-22 compared with 2017-18 to identify future directions for interventions.MethodsNational IPC focal points were invited to complete an online survey measuring IPC minimum requirements from July 19, 2021, to Jan 31, 2022. The primary outcome was the proportion of countries meeting IPC minimum requirements. Country characteristics associated with this outcome were assessed with beta regression. Subset analyses were conducted to compare the 2021-22 indicators with a WHO IPC survey conducted in 2017-18 and to assess the correlation of the proportion of IPC minimum requirements met with the results of other WHO metrics.Findings106 countries (ie, 13 low income, 27 lower-middle income, 33 upper-middle income, and 33 high income) participated in the survey (56% response rate). Four (4%) of 106 met all IPC minimum requirements. The highest scoring IPC core component was multimodal improvement strategies and the lowest was IPC education and training. The odds of meeting IPC minimum requirements was higher among high-income countries compared with low-income countries (adjusted odds ratio 2·7, 95% CI 1·3-5·8; p=0·020). Compared with the 2017-18 survey, there was a significant increase in the proportion of countries reporting an active national IPC programme (65% to 82%, p=0·037) and a dedicated budget (26% to 44%, p=0·037). Evaluation of the IPC minimum requirements compared with other survey instruments revealed a low positive correlation.InterpretationTo build resilient health systems capable of withstanding future health threats, urgently scaling up adherence to WHO IPC minimum requirements is essential.FundingWHO.TranslationsFor the French and Spanish translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.
| S-EPMC11420467 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMeaningful research creates evidence for Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) practice.AimTo establish Infection Prevention Society (IPS) members' research priorities to support future research projects.MethodsA mixed methods convergent parallel design incorporating a cross-sectional survey of IPS members (2022-2023), and focus group findings from the IPS Consultative Committee, (October 2022). Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics. Qualitative data were transcribed verbatim, entered into NVivo 12, and analysed using a thematic analysis approach.Findings/results132 IPS members responded to the survey, including 120 (90.9%) nurses. The three most prevalent priorities were: Quality Improvement and Patient Safety (n = 84, 16.1%); IPC Training and Education (n = 77, 14.8%); and IPC Evidence-based Guidelines (n = 76, 14.6%). Analysis of the focus group transcripts identified six emergent themes 'Patient Centred Care', 'Training and Education', 'IPC Role and Identity', 'IPC Leadership', 'IPC is Everyone's Responsibility', and 'Research Activity'. Triangulation of findings demonstrated concordance between quantitative and qualitative findings with Quality Improvement and Patient Safety (QIPS) and Training and Education identified as priority research areas.DiscussionThis study highlights the necessity of developing support systems and incorporating research priorities in QIPS, as well as Training and Education. The findings of this study align with the recommended core competencies and components for effective infection prevention and control programs, making them relevant to QIPS initiatives. The outcomes of the study will serve as a valuable resource to guide the IPS Research and Development Committee in delivering practical support to IPS members.
| S-EPMC10998549 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundStrengthening infection prevention and control (IPC) is essential to combat healthcare-associated infections, antimicrobial resistance, and to prevent and respond to outbreaks.AimTo assess national IPC programmes worldwide according to the World Health Organization (WHO) IPC core components.MethodsBetween June 1st, 2017 and November 30th, 2018, a multi-country, cross-sectional study was conducted, based on semi-structured interviews with national IPC focal points of countries that pledged to the WHO 'Clean Care is Safer Care' challenge. Results and differences between regions and national income levels were summarized using descriptive statistics.FindingsEighty-eight of 103 (85.4%) eligible countries participated; 22.7% were low-income, 19.3% lower-middle-income, 23.9% upper-middle-income, and 34.1% high-income economies. A national IPC programme existed in 62.5%, but only 26.1% had a dedicated budget. National guidelines were available in 67.0%, but only 36.4% and 21.6% of countries had an implementation strategy and evaluated compliance with guidelines, respectively. Undergraduate IPC curriculum and in-service and postgraduate IPC training were reported by 35.2%, 54.5%, and 42% of countries, respectively. Healthcare-associated infection surveillance was reported by 46.6% of countries, with significant differences ranging from 83.3% (high-income) to zero (low-income) (P < 0.001); monitoring and feedback of IPC indicators was reported by 65.9%. Only 12.5% of countries had all core components in place.ConclusionMost countries have IPC programme and guidelines, but many less have invested adequate resources and translated them in implementation and monitoring, particularly in low-income countries. Leadership support at the national and global level is needed to achieve implementation of the core components in all countries.
| S-EPMC7884929 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC11250868 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe first case of COVID-19 in Nigeria was reported on February 27, 2020, and over time, spread across the country leading to many healthcare worker infections. The risk of transmission of COVID-19 within healthcare facilities makes it necessary to establish infection prevention and control measures. The World Health Organisation supported the Nigeria Centre for Disease Control to conduct a train-the-trainers workshop on infection prevention and control for key healthcare workers across Nigeria.Aim/objectivesThis study aims to describe the process and results of train-the-trainers as an intervention for national capacity building in infection prevention and control for COVID-19 among healthcare workers in Nigeria.MethodsEight-hour sessions were held over three days with face-to-face instruction and practical hands-on experience in April 2020. A total of 61 healthcare workers participated across the six geographic zones of Nigeria: North Central, North East, North West, South West, South East, and South South. The training included slide presentations, case-based scenarios, and practical hands-on sessions with plenary discussions. Pre- and post-test assessments were used to evaluate knowledge of COVID-19, triage, and infection prevention and control among healthcare workers.Finding/results69 % (42) of the participants were male 31 % (19) were female, and the majority (67 %) were medical doctors. Others attending were nurses or health administrators. Of the 70 % (26) of the states with existing infection prevention and control structures within the COVID emergency response, only 40 % were functional. The average percentage of pre-test and post-test scores were 60.8 ± 13.4 and 67.8 ± 9 0.3 respectively, showing a statistically significant difference (p > 0.001) in trainee knowledge. Additionally, 70 % of participants evaluated the training workshop as "satisfactory" or higher in training format, relevance for daily clinical work, active participation, learning new concepts, and logistics.ConclusionNationwide infection prevention and control training is feasible during a national health crisis. Infection prevention and control is cardinal in the containment of epidemic-prone diseases like COVID-19 and is invaluable in the prevention of healthcare-associated infections in healthcare settings.
| S-EPMC10682610 | biostudies-literature