Current practice of infection control in Dutch primary care: Results of an online survey.
Adult
Aged
Cross Infection
/ prevention & control
Disease Transmission, Infectious
/ prevention & control
Disinfection
/ methods
Female
General Practitioners
Guideline Adherence
/ statistics & numerical data
Hand Hygiene
/ statistics & numerical data
Humans
Infection Control
/ methods
Male
Middle Aged
Netherlands
Personal Protective Equipment
/ statistics & numerical data
Primary Health Care
/ methods
Surveys and Questionnaires
Environmental cleaning
General practitioners
Hand hygiene
Health care–associated infections
Infection prevention and control
Personal protective equipment
Journal
American journal of infection control
ISSN: 1527-3296
Titre abrégé: Am J Infect Control
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8004854
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 2019
06 2019
Historique:
received:
13
06
2018
revised:
08
11
2018
accepted:
08
11
2018
pubmed:
9
1
2019
medline:
7
5
2020
entrez:
9
1
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Good infection prevention is an important aspect of quality of medical care. The aim was to evaluate infection prevention and control (IPC) performance among Dutch general practitioners (GPs). Based on the current national IPC guidelines for GPs, a self-administered anonymous online questionnaire was developed and sent to GPs in the Nijmegen region of the Netherlands. Thirty-two questions were constructed to survey characteristics of GPs' offices and assess current performance of IPC measures. One hundred questionnaires were included in our analysis. The preferred method of hand hygiene was soap and water (56%) versus alcohol-based handrub (44%). The cleaning of nondisposable, noncritical, semicritical, and critical instruments was consistent with national guideline recommendations or superior to them in 100%, 49%, and 97% of cases, respectively. An average of 57% of GPs reported environmental cleaning frequencies that were compliant with the national guidelines or superior to them. Personal protective equipment was available in 62% of GPs' practices but used in only 25% of home visits to patients. Not all national IPC guidelines seem to be followed to the fullest extent. The current situation indicates there is room for potential improvement regarding implementation of IPC measures in GPs' offices. Area-specific guidelines and continuous medical education regarding IPC may help improve the situation.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Good infection prevention is an important aspect of quality of medical care. The aim was to evaluate infection prevention and control (IPC) performance among Dutch general practitioners (GPs).
METHODS
Based on the current national IPC guidelines for GPs, a self-administered anonymous online questionnaire was developed and sent to GPs in the Nijmegen region of the Netherlands. Thirty-two questions were constructed to survey characteristics of GPs' offices and assess current performance of IPC measures.
RESULTS
One hundred questionnaires were included in our analysis. The preferred method of hand hygiene was soap and water (56%) versus alcohol-based handrub (44%). The cleaning of nondisposable, noncritical, semicritical, and critical instruments was consistent with national guideline recommendations or superior to them in 100%, 49%, and 97% of cases, respectively. An average of 57% of GPs reported environmental cleaning frequencies that were compliant with the national guidelines or superior to them. Personal protective equipment was available in 62% of GPs' practices but used in only 25% of home visits to patients.
CONCLUSIONS
Not all national IPC guidelines seem to be followed to the fullest extent. The current situation indicates there is room for potential improvement regarding implementation of IPC measures in GPs' offices. Area-specific guidelines and continuous medical education regarding IPC may help improve the situation.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30616933
pii: S0196-6553(18)31099-X
doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2018.11.010
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
643-647Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.