Surgical site infection risk factors identified for patients undergoing colon procedures, New York State 2009-2010.

BACKGROUND: Since 2007, New York State (NYS) hospitals have been required to report surgical site infections (SSIs) following colon procedures to the NYS Department of Health, using the National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN). The purpose of this study was to identify risk factors for the development of SSIs in patients undergoing colon procedures. METHODS: NYS has been conducting validation studies at hospitals to assess the accuracy of the surveillance data reported by the participating hospitals. A sample of patients undergoing colon procedures in NYS hospitals were included in hospital-acquired infection program validation studies in 2009 and 2010. Medical chart reviews and on-site visits were performed to verify patient information reported and to evaluate additional risk factors for SSI. Bivariable and multivariable logistic regressions were performed. RESULTS: A total of 2,656 colon procedures were included in this analysis, including 698 SSI cases. Multivariable analysis indicated that SSI following colon procedure was associated with body mass index greater than 30 (odds ratio [OR], 1.48 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.21-1.80]), male sex (OR, 1.34 [95% CI, 1.10-1.64]), American Society of Anesthesiologists physical classification score greater than 3 (OR, 1.33 [95% CI, 1.08-1.64]), procedure duration, transfusion (OR, 1.32 [95% CI, 1.05-1.66]), left-side colon surgical procedures, other gastroenterologic procedures, irrigation, hospital bed size greater than 500, and medical school affiliation. CONCLUSIONS: Male sex, obesity, transfusion, type of procedure, and prolonged duration were significant factors associated with overall infection risk after adjusting other factors. Additional factors not collected in the NHSN slightly improved prediction of SSIs.

Trends in validity of central line-associated bloodstream infection surveillance data, New York State, 2007-2010.

BACKGROUND: In 2007, New York State (NYS) hospitals began mandatory public reporting of central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) data associated with intensive care units (ICUs) into the National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN). Facilities were required to use the NHSN device-associated CLABSI criteria to identify laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infections. METHODS: Onsite audits were conducted in ICUs by NYS hospital-acquired infection program staff using a standardized database. Hospitals provided ICU patient medical records with a positive blood culture during a selected time frame. RESULTS: Between 2007 and 2010, an average of 79% of all reporting hospitals were audited annually. Of the 5,697 patients audited, 3,104 (54%) had a central line in place, and 650 of the patients with a central line (21%) were identified as having a CLABSI by the hospital-acquired infection program reviewer. Between 2007 and 2010, the specificity increased from 90% to 99%, whereas the sensitivity remained stable at approximately 71%. As a result of the audit process, the NYS 2010 CLABSI rate increased by 5.6%. CONCLUSIONS: A standardized audit process has helped improve the accuracy of CLABSI reporting. Data validation provides consistent data for measuring the progress of infection prevention strategies and allows for relevant comparison of ICU data.

Comparison of 2 Clostridium difficile surveillance methods: National Healthcare Safety Network's laboratory-identified event reporting module versus clinical infection surveillance.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) laboratory-identified (LabID) event reporting module for Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is an adequate proxy measure of clinical CDI for public reporting purposes by comparing the 2 surveillance methods. DESIGN: Validation study. SETTING: Thirty New York State acute care hospitals. METHODS: Six months of data were collected by 30 facilities using a clinical infection surveillance definition while also submitting the NHSN LabID event for CDI. The data sets were matched and compared to determine whether the assigned clinical case status matched the LabID case status. A subset of mismatches was evaluated further, and reasons for the mismatches were quantified. Infection rates determined using the 2 definitions were compared. RESULTS: A total of 3,301 CDI cases were reported. Analysis of the original data yielded a 67.3% (2,223/3,301) overall case status match. After review and validation, there was 81.3% (2,683/3,301) agreement. The most common reason for disagreement (54.9%) occurred because the symptom onset was less than 48 hours after admission but the positive specimen was collected on hospital day 4 or later. The NHSN LabID hospital onset rate was 29% higher than the corresponding clinical rate and was generally consistent across all hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Use of the NHSN LabID event minimizes the burden of surveillance and standardizes the process. With a greater than 80% match between the NHSN LabID event data and the clinical infection surveillance data, the New York State Department of Health made the decision to use the NHSN LabID event CDI data for public reporting purposes.

Lessons learned while implementing mandatory health care-associated infection reporting in New York State.

New York State Public Health Law §2819, requiring the mandatory public reporting of health care-associated infections, was enacted in July 2005. This article describes key provisions in the legislation, New York State health care-associated infection program development, the rationale for selection of the National Healthcare Safety Network for reporting, and lessons learned.

Use of administrative data in efficient auditing of hospital-acquired surgical site infections, New York State 2009-2010.

OBJECTIVE: To efficiently validate the accuracy of surgical site infection (SSI) data reported to the National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) by New York State (NYS) hospitals. DESIGN: Validation study. SETTING: 176 NYS hospitals. METHODS: NYS Department of Health staff validated the data reported to NHSN by review of a stratified sample of medical records from each hospital. The four strata were (1) SSIs reported to NHSN; (2) records with an indication of infection from diagnosis codes in administrative data but not reported to NHSN as SSIs; (3) records with discordant procedure codes in NHSN and state data sets; (4) records not in the other three strata. RESULTS: A total of 7,059 surgical charts (6% of the procedures reported by hospitals) were reviewed. In stratum 1, 7% of reported SSIs did not meet the criteria for inclusion in NHSN and were subsequently removed. In stratum 2, 24% of records indicated missed SSIs not reported to NHSN, whereas in strata 3 and 4, only 1% of records indicated missed SSIs; these SSIs were subsequently added to NHSN. Also, in stratum 3, 75% of records were not coded for the correct NHSN procedure. Errors were highest for colon data; the NYS colon SSI rate increased by 7.5% as a result of hospital audits. CONCLUSIONS: Audits are vital for ensuring the accuracy of hospital-acquired infection (HAI) data so that hospital HAI rates can be fairly compared. Use of administrative data increased the efficiency of identifying problems in hospitals' SSI surveillance that caused SSIs to be unreported and caused errors in denominator data.

Risk factors for coronary artery bypass graft chest surgical site infections in New York State, 2008.

BACKGROUND: All hospitals in New York State (NYS) are required to report surgical site infections (SSIs) occurring after coronary artery bypass graft surgery. This report describes the risk adjustment method used by NYS for reporting hospital SSI rates, and additional methods used to explore remaining differences in infection rates. METHODS: All patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery in NYS in 2008 were monitored for chest SSI following the National Healthcare Safety Network protocol. The NYS Cardiac Surgery Reporting System and a survey of hospital infection prevention practices provided additional risk information. Models were developed to standardize hospital-specific infection rates and to assess additional risk factors and practices. RESULTS: The National Healthcare Safety Network risk score based on duration of surgery, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, and wound class were not highly predictive of chest SSIs. The addition of diabetes, obesity, end-stage renal disease, sex, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and Medicaid payer to the model improved the discrimination between procedures that resulted in SSI and those that did not by 25%. Hospital-reported infection prevention practices were not significantly related to SSI rates. CONCLUSIONS: Additional risk factors collected using a secondary database improved the prediction of SSIs, however, there remained unexplained variation in rates between hospitals.