Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
State health department validations of central line-associated bloodstream infection events reported via the National Healthcare Safety Network.
Bagchi, Suparna; Watkins, Jennifer; Pollock, Daniel A; Edwards, Jonathan R; Allen-Bridson, Katherine.
Afiliação
  • Bagchi S; National Healthcare Safety Network, Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA. Electronic address: iyj9@cdc.gov.
  • Watkins J; CACI Inc, Atlanta, GA.
  • Pollock DA; National Healthcare Safety Network, Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA.
  • Edwards JR; National Healthcare Safety Network, Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA.
  • Allen-Bridson K; National Healthcare Safety Network, Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA.
Am J Infect Control ; 46(11): 1290-1295, 2018 11.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29903420
BACKGROUND: Numerous state health departments (SHDs) have validated central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) data, and results from these studies provide important insights into the accuracy of CLABSI reporting to the National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) and remediable shortcomings in adherence to the CLABSI definition and criteria. METHODS: State CLABSI validation results were obtained from peer-reviewed publications, reports on SHD Web sites, and via personal communications with the SHD health care-associated infections coordinator. Data accuracy measures included pooled mean sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value. Total CLABSI error rate was computed as the proportion of mismatches among total records reviewed. When available, reasons for CLABSI misclassification reported by SHDs were reviewed. RESULTS: At least 23 SHDs that have completed CLABSI validations indicated sensitivity (pooled mean, 82.9%), specificity (pooled mean, 98.5%), positive predictive value (pooled mean, 94.1%), and negative predictive value (pooled mean, 95.9%) of CLABSI reporting. The pooled error rate of CLABSI reporting was 4.4%. Reasons for CLABSI misclassification included incorrect secondary bloodstream infection attribution, misapplication of CLABSI definition, missed case finding, applying clinical over surveillance definitions, misapplication of laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infection 2 definition, and misapplication of general NHSN definitions. CONCLUSIONS: CLABSI underreporting remains a major concern; validations conducted by SHDs provide an important impetus for improved reporting. SHDs are uniquely positioned to engage facilities in collaborative validation reviews that allow transparency, education, and relationship building.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Cateterismo Venoso Central / Infecção Hospitalar / Bacteriemia / Infecções Relacionadas a Cateter País/Região como assunto: America do norte Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2018 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Cateterismo Venoso Central / Infecção Hospitalar / Bacteriemia / Infecções Relacionadas a Cateter País/Região como assunto: America do norte Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2018 Tipo de documento: Article