Intermittent point prevalence surveys on healthcare-associated infections, 2011 and 2016, in England: what are the surveillance and intervention priorities?
England
Healthcare-associated
Prevalence
Survey
infection
Journal
The Journal of hospital infection
ISSN: 1532-2939
Titre abrégé: J Hosp Infect
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8007166
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Oct 2023
Oct 2023
Historique:
received:
22
02
2023
revised:
12
07
2023
accepted:
20
07
2023
medline:
4
10
2023
pubmed:
3
8
2023
entrez:
2
8
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Point prevalence surveys are an important surveillance method for determining the burden of healthcare-associated infections (HCAIs). To outline the key results of two point prevalence surveys in England (2011 and 2016). All National Health Service and independent sector hospitals in England were eligible to participate. Data were collected between September and November in both 2011 and 2016 based on the protocol and codebook devised by the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Analysis was performed using Stata Version 13 and SAS Version 9.3. A mixed-effects model was applied, which allowed estimation of organization-specific means and accounted for the heterogeneity in the responses from different organizations. A total of 100,755 case records were included (52,433 in 2011 and 48,312 in 2016). The estimated prevalence of HCAIs was slightly higher in 2016 [6.89%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 6.21-7.57%] than in 2011 (6.41%, 95% CI 5.75-7.06%). In both surveys, the prevalence of HCAIs was highest in adult intensive care units (23.1% in 2011, 21.2% in 2016), and pneumonia/lower respiratory tract infections was the most common cause of HCAIs (22.7% in 2011 vs 29.2% in 2016). Inpatients in acute hospitals were older and had higher risk of dying in 2016 compared with 2011; however, the proportion of inpatients with HCAIs or on antibiotics did not differ significantly. The burden of HCAIs in English hospitals increased slightly between 2011 and 2016. However, the proportion of inpatients with HCAIs or on antibiotics did not differ significantly.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Point prevalence surveys are an important surveillance method for determining the burden of healthcare-associated infections (HCAIs).
AIM
OBJECTIVE
To outline the key results of two point prevalence surveys in England (2011 and 2016).
METHODS
METHODS
All National Health Service and independent sector hospitals in England were eligible to participate. Data were collected between September and November in both 2011 and 2016 based on the protocol and codebook devised by the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Analysis was performed using Stata Version 13 and SAS Version 9.3. A mixed-effects model was applied, which allowed estimation of organization-specific means and accounted for the heterogeneity in the responses from different organizations.
FINDINGS
RESULTS
A total of 100,755 case records were included (52,433 in 2011 and 48,312 in 2016). The estimated prevalence of HCAIs was slightly higher in 2016 [6.89%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 6.21-7.57%] than in 2011 (6.41%, 95% CI 5.75-7.06%). In both surveys, the prevalence of HCAIs was highest in adult intensive care units (23.1% in 2011, 21.2% in 2016), and pneumonia/lower respiratory tract infections was the most common cause of HCAIs (22.7% in 2011 vs 29.2% in 2016). Inpatients in acute hospitals were older and had higher risk of dying in 2016 compared with 2011; however, the proportion of inpatients with HCAIs or on antibiotics did not differ significantly.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The burden of HCAIs in English hospitals increased slightly between 2011 and 2016. However, the proportion of inpatients with HCAIs or on antibiotics did not differ significantly.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37532196
pii: S0195-6701(23)00244-X
doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2023.07.015
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Anti-Bacterial Agents
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
24-33Informations de copyright
Crown Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.