Association of a bundled intervention with surgical site infections among patients undergoing cardiac, hip, or knee surgery.

IMPORTANCE: Previous studies suggested that a bundled intervention was associated with lower rates of Staphylococcus aureus surgical site infections (SSIs) among patients having cardiac or orthopedic operations. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether the implementation of an evidence-based bundle is associated with a lower risk of S. aureus SSIs in patients undergoing cardiac operations or hip or knee arthroplasties. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Twenty hospitals in 9 US states participated in this pragmatic study; rates of SSIs were collected for a median of 39 months (range, 39-43) during the preintervention period (March 1, 2009, to intervention) and a median of 21 months (range, 14-22) during the intervention period (from intervention start through March 31, 2014). INTERVENTIONS: Patients whose preoperative nares screens were positive for methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) or methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) were asked to apply mupirocin intranasally twice daily for up to 5 days and to bathe daily with chlorhexidine-gluconate (CHG) for up to 5 days before their operations. MRSA carriers received vancomycin and cefazolin or cefuroxime for perioperative prophylaxis; all others received cefazolin or cefuroxime. Patients who were MRSA-negative and MSSA-negative bathed with CHG the night before and morning of their operations. Patients were treated as MRSA-positive if screening results were unknown. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was complex (deep incisional or organ space) S. aureus SSIs. Monthly SSI counts were analyzed using Poisson regression analysis. RESULTS: After a 3-month phase-in period, bundle adherence was 83% (39% full adherence; 44% partial adherence). Overall, 101 complex S. aureus SSIs occurred after 28,218 operations during the preintervention period and 29 occurred after 14,316 operations during the intervention period (mean rate per 10,000 operations, 36 for preintervention period vs 21 for intervention period, difference, -15 [95% CI, -35 to -2]; rate ratio [RR], 0.58 [95% CI, 0.37 to 0.92]). The rates of complex S. aureus SSIs decreased for hip or knee arthroplasties (difference per 10,000 operations, -17 [95% CI, -39 to 0]; RR, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.29 to 0.80]) and for cardiac operations (difference per 10,000 operations, -6 [95% CI, -48 to 8]; RR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.47 to 1.57]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this multicenter study, a bundle comprising S. aureus screening, decolonization, and targeted prophylaxis was associated with a modest, statistically significant decrease in complex S. aureus SSIs.

The impact of hospital practice on central venous catheter associated bloodstream infection rates at the patient and unit level: a multicenter study.

OBJECTIVE: Little is known about factors driving variation in bloodstream infection (BSI) rates between institutions. The objectives of this study are to (1) identify patient, process of care, and hospital factors that influence intensive care unit (ICU)-level BSI rates and (2) compare those factors to individual risk factors identified in a cohort analysis. DESIGN: In this multicenter prospective observational study, the authors measured the process of care for 2970 randomly sampled central venous catheter insertions over 13 months. SETTING: Medical, surgical, and medical/surgical ICUs of 37 domestic and 13 international hospitals. RESULTS: Significant correlates of unit-level BSI rates were percentage of female patients, patients on dialysis, ICU bed size, percentage of practitioners with low numbers of previous insertions, and percentage inserted by nurses. Patient-level analysis identified gender, age, posttransplant, postsurgery, and use of the line for parenteral nutrition. CONCLUSIONS: Factors that influence unit-to-unit variation may differ from factors identified in studies of individual patient risk.

Comparing bloodstream infection rates: the effect of indicator specifications in the evaluation of processes and indicators in infection control (EPIC) study.

OBJECTIVE: Bloodstream infection (BSI) rates are used as comparative clinical performance indicators; however, variations in definitions and data-collection approaches make it difficult to compare and interpret rates. To determine the extent to which variation in indicator specifications affected infection rates and hospital performance rankings, we compared absolute rates and relative rankings of hospitals across 5 BSI indicators. DESIGN: Multicenter observational study. BSI rate specifications varied by data source (clinical data, administrative data, or both), scope (hospital wide or intensive care unit specific), and inclusion/exclusion criteria. As appropriate, hospital-specific infection rates and rankings were calculated by processing data from each site according to 2-5 different specifications. SETTING: A total of 28 hospitals participating in the EPIC study. PARTICIPANTS: Hospitals submitted deidentified information about all patients with BSIs from January through September 1999. RESULTS: Median BSI rates for 2 indicators based on intensive care unit surveillance data ranged from 2.23 to 2.91 BSIs per 1000 central-line days. In contrast, median rates for indicators based on administrative data varied from 0.046 to 7.03 BSIs per 100 patients. Hospital-specific rates and rankings varied substantially as different specifications were applied; the rates of 8 of 10 hospitals were both greater than and less than the mean. Correlations of hospital rankings among indicator pairs were generally low (rs=0-0.45), except when both indicators were based on intensive care unit surveillance (rs = 0.83). CONCLUSIONS: Although BSI rates seem to be a logical indicator of clinical performance, the use of various indicator specifications can produce remarkably different judgments of absolute and relative performance for a given hospital. Recent national initiatives continue to mix methods for specifying BSI rates; this practice is likely to limit the usefulness of such information for comparing and improving performance.

Preventing central venous catheter-associated primary bloodstream infections: characteristics of practices among hospitals participating in the Evaluation of Processes and Indicators in Infection Control (EPIC) study.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the conceptual framework and methodology of the Evaluation of Processes and Indicators in Infection Control (EPIC) study and present results of CVC insertion characteristics and organizational practices for preventing BSIs. The goal of the EPIC study was to evaluate relationships among processes of care, organizational characteristics, and the outcome of BSI. DESIGN: This was a multicenter prospective observational study of variation in hospital practices related to preventing CVC-associated BSIs. Process of care information (eg, barrier use during insertions and experience of the inserting practitioner) was collected for a random sample of approximately 5 CVC insertions per month per hospital during November 1998 to December 1999. Organization demographic and practice information (eg, surveillance activities and staff and ICU nurse staffing levels) was also collected. SETTING: Medical, surgical, or medical-surgical ICUs from 55 hospitals (41 U.S. and 14 international sites). PARTICIPANTS: Process information was obtained for 3,320 CVC insertions with an average of 58.2 (+/- 16.1) insertions per hospital. Fifty-four hospitals provided policy and practice information. RESULTS: Staff spent an average of 13 hours per week in study ICU surveillance. Most patients received nontunneled, multiple lumen CVCs, of which fewer than 25% were coated with antimicrobial material. Regarding barriers, most clinicians wore masks (81.5%) and gowns (76.8%); 58.1% used large drapes. Few hospitals (18.1%) used an intravenous team to manage ICU CVCs. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial variation exists in CVC insertion practice and BSI prevention activities. Understanding which practices have the greatest impact on BSI rates can help hospitals better target improvement interventions.

Does health care role and experience influence perception of safety culture related to preventing infections?

Growing evidence reveals the importance of improving safety culture in efforts to eliminate health care-associated infections. This multisite, cross-sectional survey examined the association between professional role and health care experience on infection prevention safety culture at 5 hospitals. The findings suggest that frontline health care technicians are less directly engaged in improvement efforts and safety education than other staff and that infection prevention safety culture varies more by hospital than by staff position and experience.