Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-2lccl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T01:19:14.861Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An Automated Algorithm to Preselect Patients to Be Assessed Individually in Point Prevalence Surveys for Hospital-Acquired Infections in Surgery

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 May 2016

Roel H. R. A. Streefkerk ,
Peter W. Moorman ,
Gerard A. Parlevliet ,
Conrad van der Hoeven ,
Henri A. Verbrugh ,
Margreet C. Vos  and
Roel P. Verkooijen
Roel H. R. A. Streefkerk*
Affiliation:
Department of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Peter W. Moorman
Affiliation:
Institute of Medical Informatics, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Gerard A. Parlevliet
Affiliation:
Department of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Conrad van der Hoeven
Affiliation:
Department of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Henri A. Verbrugh
Affiliation:
Department of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Margreet C. Vos
Affiliation:
Department of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Roel P. Verkooijen*
Affiliation:
Department of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
*
Department of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, Erasmus University Medical Center, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, Netherlands (h.streefkerk@erasmusmc.nl).
Department of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, Erasmus University Medical Center, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, Netherlands (h.streefkerk@erasmusmc.nl).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In this pilot study, we evaluate an algorithm that uses predictive clinical and laboratory parameters to differentiate between patients with hospital-acquired infection (HAI) and patients without HAI. Seventy-four percent of the studied population of surgical patients could be reliably (negative predictive value of 98%) excluded from detailed assessment by the infection control practitioner.

Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2014;35(7):886-887

Type
Concise Communication
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 35 , Issue 7 , July 2014 , pp. 886 - 887
Copyright
© 2014 by The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America. All rights reserved.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Gastmeier, P, Sohr, D, Rath, A, et al. Repeated prevalence investigations on nosocomial infections for continuous surveillance. J Hosp Infect 2000;45(1):47–53.Google Scholar
2. Graham, PL 3rd, San Gabriel, P, Lutwick, S, Haas, J, Saiman, L. Validation of a multicenter computer-based surveillance system for hospital-acquired bloodstream infections in neonatal intensive care departments. Am J Infect Control 2004;32(4):232–234.Google Scholar
3. Brossette, SE, Hacek, DM, Gavin, PJ, et al. A laboratory-based, hospital-wide, electronic marker for nosocomial infection: the future of infection control surveillance? Am J Clin Pathol 2006;125(1):34–39.Google Scholar
4. Pokorny, L, Rovira, A, Martin-Baranera, M, Gimeno, C, Alonso-Tarres, C, Vilarasau, J. Automatic detection of patients with nosocomial infection by a computer-based surveillance system: a validation study in a general hospital. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2006;27(5):500–503 Google Scholar
5. Leth, RA, Moller, JK. Surveillance of hospital-acquired infections based on electronic hospital registries. J Hosp Infect 2006;62(1):71–79.Google Scholar
6. Leal, J, Laupland, KB. Validity of electronic surveillance systems: a systematic review. J Hosp Infect 2008;69(3):220–229.Google Scholar
7. Wright, MO. Automated surveillance and infection control: toward a better tomorrow. Am J Infect Control 2008;36(3):S1–S6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Klompas, M, Yokoe, DS. Automated surveillance of health care-associated infections. Clin Infect Dis 2009;48(9):1268–1275 Google Scholar
9. Platt, R, Yokoe, DS, Sands, KE. Automated methods for surveillance of surgical site infections. Emerg Infect Dis 2001;7(2):212–216 Google Scholar
10. Horan, TC. CDC/NHSN surveillance definition of health care–associated infection and criteria for specific types of infections in the acute care setting. Am J Infect Control 2008(36):309–332.Google Scholar