Implementing a toolkit for the prevention, management and control of carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae in English acute hospitals trusts: a qualitative evaluation.


Journal

BMC health services research
ISSN: 1472-6963
Titre abrégé: BMC Health Serv Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088677

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
12 Oct 2019
Historique:
received: 29 03 2019
accepted: 29 08 2019
entrez: 14 10 2019
pubmed: 14 10 2019
medline: 3 1 2020
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Antimicrobial resistance is an increasing problem in hospitals world-wide. Following other countries, English hospitals experienced outbreaks of carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (CPE), a bacterial infection commonly resistant to last resort antibiotics. One way to improve CPE prevention, management and control is the production of guidelines, such as the CPE toolkit published by Public Health England in December 2013. The aim of this research was to investigate the implementation of the CPE toolkit and to identify barriers and facilitators to inform future policies. Acute hospital trusts (N = 12) were purposively sampled based on their self-assessed CPE colonisation rates and time point of introducing local CPE action plans. Following maximum variation sampling, 44 interviews with hospital staff were conducted between April and August 2017 using a semi-structured topic guide based on the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation and Behaviour Model and the Theoretical Domains Framework, covering areas of influences on behaviour. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis. The national CPE toolkit was widely disseminated within infection prevention and control teams (IPCT), but awareness was rare among other hospital staff. Local plans, developed by IPCTs referring to the CPE toolkit while considering local circumstances, were in place in all hospitals. Implementation barriers included: shortage of isolation facilities for CPE patients, time pressures, and competing demands. Facilitators were within hospital and across-hospital collaborations and knowledge sharing, availability of dedicated IPCTs, leadership support and prioritisation of CPE as an important concern. Participants using the CPE toolkit had mixed views, appreciating its readability and clarity about patient management, but voicing concerns about the lack of transparency on the level of evidence and the practicality of implementation. They recommended regular updates, additional clarifications, tailored information and implementation guidance. There were problems with the awareness and implementation of the CPE toolkit and frontline staff saw room for improvement, identifying implementation barriers and facilitators. An updated CPE toolkit version should provide comprehensive and instructive guidance on evidence-based CPE prevention, management and control procedures and their implementation in a modular format with sections tailored to hospitals' CPE status and to different staff groups.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Antimicrobial resistance is an increasing problem in hospitals world-wide. Following other countries, English hospitals experienced outbreaks of carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (CPE), a bacterial infection commonly resistant to last resort antibiotics. One way to improve CPE prevention, management and control is the production of guidelines, such as the CPE toolkit published by Public Health England in December 2013. The aim of this research was to investigate the implementation of the CPE toolkit and to identify barriers and facilitators to inform future policies.
METHODS METHODS
Acute hospital trusts (N = 12) were purposively sampled based on their self-assessed CPE colonisation rates and time point of introducing local CPE action plans. Following maximum variation sampling, 44 interviews with hospital staff were conducted between April and August 2017 using a semi-structured topic guide based on the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation and Behaviour Model and the Theoretical Domains Framework, covering areas of influences on behaviour. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis.
RESULTS RESULTS
The national CPE toolkit was widely disseminated within infection prevention and control teams (IPCT), but awareness was rare among other hospital staff. Local plans, developed by IPCTs referring to the CPE toolkit while considering local circumstances, were in place in all hospitals. Implementation barriers included: shortage of isolation facilities for CPE patients, time pressures, and competing demands. Facilitators were within hospital and across-hospital collaborations and knowledge sharing, availability of dedicated IPCTs, leadership support and prioritisation of CPE as an important concern. Participants using the CPE toolkit had mixed views, appreciating its readability and clarity about patient management, but voicing concerns about the lack of transparency on the level of evidence and the practicality of implementation. They recommended regular updates, additional clarifications, tailored information and implementation guidance.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
There were problems with the awareness and implementation of the CPE toolkit and frontline staff saw room for improvement, identifying implementation barriers and facilitators. An updated CPE toolkit version should provide comprehensive and instructive guidance on evidence-based CPE prevention, management and control procedures and their implementation in a modular format with sections tailored to hospitals' CPE status and to different staff groups.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31606053
doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4492-4
pii: 10.1186/s12913-019-4492-4
pmc: PMC6790044
doi:

Substances chimiques

Anti-Bacterial Agents 0

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

689

Subventions

Organisme : National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit in Evaluation of Interventions
ID : Not applicable

Références

Lancet Infect Dis. 2013 Sep;13(9):785-96
pubmed: 23969216
J Clin Epidemiol. 2015 May;68(5):498-509
pubmed: 25684154
BMC Med. 2011 May 09;9:49
pubmed: 21554696
BMJ. 2006 Feb 18;332(7538):413-6
pubmed: 16484270
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2017 Mar;23(3):188-196
pubmed: 27746394
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013 Sep 18;13:117
pubmed: 24047204
BMJ. 2008 Sep 29;337:a1655
pubmed: 18824488
Am J Infect Control. 2014 Dec;42(12):1270-3
pubmed: 25465255
Nurs Times. 2005 Aug 9-15;101(32):36-8
pubmed: 16119589
J Gen Intern Med. 2004 Jul;19(7):726-31
pubmed: 15209585
Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol. 2006 Sep;20(3):379-95
pubmed: 17080691
J Hosp Infect. 2017 Jan;95(1):3-45
pubmed: 27890334
BMC Med. 2018 Apr 30;16(1):63
pubmed: 29706132
BMJ. 2015 Mar 19;350:h1258
pubmed: 25791983
Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2017 Nov 15;6:113
pubmed: 29163939
Med Mal Infect. 2014 Feb;44(2):51-6
pubmed: 24360201
BMJ. 2012 May 31;344:e3236
pubmed: 22654063
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2012 Sep;67(9):2090-100
pubmed: 22678728
Implement Sci. 2017 Jun 21;12(1):77
pubmed: 28637486
Int J Qual Health Care. 2007 Dec;19(6):349-57
pubmed: 17872937
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2018 May;39(5):516-524
pubmed: 29552995
Trends Mol Med. 2012 May;18(5):263-72
pubmed: 22480775
Implement Sci. 2011 Apr 23;6:42
pubmed: 21513547
BMC Med. 2017 Apr 27;15(1):86
pubmed: 28446169
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2012 May;18(5):439-48
pubmed: 22507111
Lancet. 2003 Oct 11;362(9391):1225-30
pubmed: 14568747
J Hosp Infect. 2018 Aug;99(4):381-389
pubmed: 29530741
Health Technol Assess. 2004 Feb;8(6):iii-iv, 1-72
pubmed: 14960256
Implement Sci. 2012 Apr 24;7:37
pubmed: 22530986
BMC Med. 2018 Jun 20;16(1):95
pubmed: 29921272
Health Policy. 2012 Feb;104(2):128-35
pubmed: 21719140
Implement Sci. 2013 Sep 30;8:113
pubmed: 24079992
Emerg Infect Dis. 2014 Jul;20(7):1170-5
pubmed: 24959688
Nurse Educ Today. 2015 Feb;35(2):e34-41
pubmed: 25482849
Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2017 Aug;50(2):127-134
pubmed: 28647532
J Hosp Infect. 2017 Nov;97(3):218-225
pubmed: 28743504
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2012 May;18(5):413-31
pubmed: 22507109

Auteurs

Annegret Schneider (A)

University College London, Gower St, Bloomsbury, London, WC1E 6BT, UK. a.schneider@ucl.ac.uk.
National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Unit in Evaluation of Interventions, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, BS8 2PS, UK. a.schneider@ucl.ac.uk.

Caroline Coope (C)

National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Unit in Evaluation of Interventions, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, BS8 2PS, UK.
Field Service South West, National Infection Service, Public Health England, 2 Rivergate, Bristol, BS1 6EH, UK.

Susan Michie (S)

University College London, Gower St, Bloomsbury, London, WC1E 6BT, UK.
National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Unit in Evaluation of Interventions, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, BS8 2PS, UK.

Richard Puleston (R)

Field Service East Midlands, National Infection Service, Public Health England, Nottingham, NG24LA, UK.

Susan Hopkins (S)

Division of Healthcare-Associated Infection and Antimicrobial Resistance, National Infection Service, Public Health England, London, UK.

Isabel Oliver (I)

National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Unit in Evaluation of Interventions, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, BS8 2PS, UK.
Field Service South West, National Infection Service, Public Health England, 2 Rivergate, Bristol, BS1 6EH, UK.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH