A Process for Assessing Products for Infection Prevention in Health Care Settings: A Framework From the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Infection control is a complex task that spans people, products, and practices in diverse settings. For years, the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC) has provided advice and guidance to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on how best to prevent infections. These recommendations have focused largely on health care delivery practices and occasionally on general categories of products. With an influx of novel infection control products and growing use of these products by frontline clinicians, an efficient process for developing transparent, rigorous product recommendations that includes myriad data sources was necessary. To address this gap, the CDC asked HICPAC to develop a process that would help inform committees considering product-related recommendations. This article describes the process to develop this approach and provides an outline of how the tool may be used when products with infection control claims are recommended in guidelines or recommendations for infection prevention.

Reducing Inappropriate Testing for the Evaluation of Diarrhea Among Hospitalized Patients.

BACKGROUND: Diarrhea is one of the most common illnesses in the United States. Evaluation frequently does not follow established guidelines. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a computerized physician order entry-based test guidance algorithm with regard to the clinical, financial, and operational impacts. METHODS: Our population was patients with diarrheal illness at a tertiary academic medical center. The intervention was a computerized physician order entry-based test guidance algorithm that restricted the use of stool cultures and ova and parasites testing of diarrhea in the adult inpatient location vs nonintervention sites, which were the emergency department, pediatric inpatient and adult and pediatric outpatient locations. We measured stool culture, ova and parasites, and Clostridium difficile testing rates from July 1, 2012 to January 31, 2016. Additionally, we calculated advisor usage, consults generated, accuracy of information, and cost savings. RESULTS: There was a significant decrease in stool culture and ova and parasites testing rates at the adult inpatient (P = .001 for both), pediatric (P < .001 for both), and adult emergency department (P < .001; P = .009) locations. The decrease at the intervention site was immediate, whereas the other locations showed a delayed but sustained decrease that suggests a collateral impact. A significant increase in the rate of stool culture and ova and parasites testing was observed in the outpatient setting (P = .02 and P = .001). We estimate that $21,931 was saved annually. CONCLUSIONS: A point-of-order test restriction algorithm for hospitalized adults with diarrhea reduced stool testing. Similar programs should be considered at other institutions and for the evaluation of other conditions.

Cost analysis of strategies to reduce blood culture contamination in the emergency department: sterile collection kits and phlebotomy teams.

OBJECTIVE: Blood culture collection practices that reduce contamination, such as sterile blood culture collection kits and phlebotomy teams, increase up-front costs for collecting cultures but may lead to net savings by eliminating downstream costs associated with contamination. The study objective was to compare overall hospital costs associated with 3 collection strategies: usual care, sterile kits, and phlebotomy teams. DESIGN: Cost analysis. SETTING: This analysis was conducted from the perspective of a hospital leadership team selecting a blood culture collection strategy for an adult emergency department (ED) with 8,000 cultures drawn annually. METHODS: Total hospital costs associated with 3 strategies were compared: (1) usual care, with nurses collecting cultures without a standardized protocol; (2) sterile kits, with nurses using a dedicated sterile collection kit; and (3) phlebotomy teams, with cultures collected by laboratory-based phlebotomists. In the base case, contamination rates associated with usual care, sterile kits, and phlebotomy teams were assumed to be 4.34%, 1.68%, and 1.10%, respectively. Total hospital costs included costs of collecting cultures and hospitalization costs according to culture results (negative, true positive, and contaminated). RESULTS: Compared with usual care, annual net savings using the sterile kit and phlebotomy team strategies were $483,219 and $288,980, respectively. Both strategies remained less costly than usual care across a broad range of sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: EDs with high blood culture contamination rates should strongly consider evidence-based strategies to reduce contamination. In addition to improving quality, implementing a sterile collection kit or phlebotomy team strategy is likely to result in net cost savings.

Public reporting of health care-associated surveillance data: recommendations from the healthcare infection control practices advisory committee.

Health care-associated infection (HAI) rates are used as measures of a health care facility's quality of patient care. Recently, these outcomes have been used to publicly rank quality efforts and determine facility reimbursement. The value of comparing HAI rates among health care facilities is limited by many factors inherent to HAI surveillance, and incentives that reward low HAI rates can lead to unintended consequences that can compromise medical care surveillance efforts, such as the use of clinical adjudication panels to veto events that meet HAI surveillance definitions.The Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee, a federal advisory committee that provides advice and guidance to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services about strategies for surveillance, prevention, and control of HAIs, assessed the challenges associated with using HAI surveillance data for external quality reporting, including the unintended consequences of clinician veto and clinical adjudication panels. Discussions with stakeholder liaisons and committee members were then used to formulate recommended standards for the use of HAI surveillance data for external facility assessment to ensure valid comparisons and to provide as level a playing field as possible.The final recommendations advocate for consistent, objective, and independent application of CDC HAI definitions with concomitant validation of HAIs and surveillance processes. The use of clinician veto and adjudication is discouraged.

Sustained improvement in hand hygiene adherence: utilizing shared accountability and financial incentives.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of an institutional hand hygiene accountability program on healthcare personnel hand hygiene adherence. DESIGN: Time-series design with correlation analysis. SETTING: Tertiary care academic medical center, including outpatient clinics and procedural areas. PARTICIPANTS: Medical center healthcare personnel. METHODS: A comprehensive hand hygiene initiative was implemented in 2 major phases starting in July 2009. Key facets of the initiative included extensive project planning, leadership buy-in and goal setting, financial incentives linked to performance, and use of a system-wide shared accountability model. Adherence was measured by designated hand hygiene observers. Adherence rates were compared between baseline and implementation phases, and monthly hand hygiene adherence rates were correlated with monthly rates of device-associated infection. RESULTS: A total of 109,988 observations were completed during the study period, with a sustained increase in hand hygiene adherence throughout each implementation phase (P < .001) as well as from one phase to the next (P < .001), such that adherence greater than 85% has been achieved since January 2011. Medical center departments were able to reclaim some rebate dollars allocated through a self-insurance trust, but during the study period, departments did not achieve full reimbursement. Hand hygiene adherence rates were inversely correlated with device-associated standardized infection ratios (R(@) = 0.70). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of this multifaceted, observational hand hygiene program was associated with sustained improvement in hand hygiene adherence. The principles of this program could be applied to other medical centers pursuing improved hand hygiene adherence among healthcare personnel.

Providers' beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors before implementing a computerized pneumococcal vaccination reminder.

BACKGROUND: The emergency department (ED) has been recommended as a suitable setting for offering pneumococcal vaccination; however, implementations of ED vaccination programs remain scarce. OBJECTIVES: To understand beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors of ED providers before implementing a computerized reminder system. METHODS: An anonymous, five-point Likert-scale, 46-item survey was administered to emergency physicians and nurses at an academic medical center. The survey included aspects of ordering patterns, implementation strategies, barriers, and factors considered important for an ED-based vaccination initiative as well as aspects of implementing a computerized vaccine-reminder system. RESULTS: Among 160 eligible ED providers, the survey was returned by 64 of 67 physicians (96%), and all 93 nurses (100%). The vaccine was considered to be cost effective by 71% of physicians, but only 2% recommended it to their patients. Although 98% of physicians accessed the computerized problem list before examining the patient, only 28% reviewed the patient's health-maintenance section. Physicians and nurses preferred a computerized vaccination-reminder system in 93% and 82%, respectively. Physicians' preferred implementation approach included a nurse standing order, combined with physician notification; nurses, however, favored a physician order. Factors for improving vaccination rates included improved computerized documentation, whereas increasing the number of ED staff was less important. Relevant implementation barriers for physicians were not remembering to offer vaccination, time constraints, and insufficient time to counsel patients. The ED was believed to be an appropriate setting in which to offer vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: Emergency department staff had favorable attitudes toward an ED-based pneumococcal vaccination program; however, considerable barriers inherent to the ED setting may challenge such a program. Applying information technology may overcome some barriers and facilitate an ED-based vaccination initiative.