We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Cyberattacks on healthcare systems are increasing in frequency and severity. Hospitals need to integrate cybersecurity preparedness into their emergency operations planning and response in order to mitigate adverse outcomes during increasingly likely cyber events. No data currently exists regarding the level of preparedness of US hospital systems for cybersecurity attacks. We surveyed hospital emergency managers to assess cybersecurity preparedness for these events.
Method:
Fifty-seven emergency managers representing hospitals across the US participated in an online Qualtrics survey regarding current preparedness and response procedures for cybersecurity hazards.
Results:
Survey responses between April 2019 and May 2021 demonstrated that a majority of hospital systems surveyed included cybersecurity disasters in their HVA (82.4%, 47/57), and most ranked it as one of their top five priorities (57.4%, 27/47). However, over half denied specifically mentioning cybersecurity in their EOPs (52.6%, 30/57). Fourteen of the 57 hospital systems (24.5%) endorsed previously activating an Emergency Response for a cybersecurity incident unrelated to Information Technology (IT) failure.
Conclusion:
The survey results suggest that American hospitals are currently underprepared for cybersecurity disasters. We emphasize the importance of prioritizing cybersecurity in HVAs and implementing specific EOP annexes for cybersecurity emergencies.
Cyberattacks on healthcare systems are increasing in frequency and severity. Hospitals need to integrate cybersecurity preparedness into their emergency operations planning and response to mitigate adverse outcomes during increasingly likely cyber events. No data currently exist regarding the level of preparedness of United States hospital systems for cybersecurity attacks. We surveyed hospital emergency managers to assess cybersecurity preparedness for these events.
Methods:
Fifty-seven emergency managers representing hospitals across the United States participated in an online Qualtrics survey regarding current preparedness and response procedures for cybersecurity hazards.
Results:
Survey responses between April 2019 and May 2021 demonstrated that a majority of hospital systems surveyed included cybersecurity disasters in their HVA (82.4%; 47/57), and most ranked it as 1 of their top 5 priorities (57.4%; 27/47). However, over half denied specifically mentioning cybersecurity in their Emergency Operations Plans (EOPs; 52.6%; 30/57). Fourteen of the 57 hospital systems (24.5%) endorsed previously activating an emergency response for a cybersecurity incident unrelated to information technology (IT) failure.
Conclusions:
The survey results suggest that American hospitals are currently underprepared for cybersecurity disasters. We emphasize the importance of prioritizing cybersecurity in Hazard Vulnerability Analyses (HVAs) and implementing specific EOP annexes for cybersecurity emergencies.
To identify the behavioral determinants—both barriers and enablers—that may impact physician hand hygiene compliance.
Design.
A qualitative study involving semistructured key informant interviews with staff physicians and residents.
Setting.
An urban, 1,100-bed multisite tertiary care Canadian hospital.
Participants.
A total of 42 staff physicians and residents in internal medicine and surgery.
Methods.
Semistructured interviews were conducted using an interview guide that was based on the theoretical domains framework (TDF), a behavior change framework comprised of 14 theoretical domains that explain health-related behavior change. Interview transcripts were analyzed using thematic content analysis involving a systematic 3-step approach: coding, generation of specific beliefs, and identification of relevant TDF domains.
Results.
Similar determinants were reported by staff physicians and residents and between medicine and surgery. A total of 53 specific beliefs from 9 theoretical domains were identified as relevant to physician hand hygiene compliance. The 9 relevant domains were knowledge; skills; beliefs about capabilities; beliefs about consequences; goals; memory, attention, and decision processes; environmental context and resources; social professional role and identity; and social influences.
Conclusions.
We identified several key determinants that physicians believe influence whether and when they practice hand hygiene at work. These beliefs identify potential individual, team, and organization targets for behavior change interventions to improve physician hand hygiene compliance.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2014;35(12):1511–1520
Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is an emerging concern in infectious disease practice. Although MRSA infections occur in a wide variety of anatomic sites, the majority of studies considering the risk factors for methicillin resistance among S. aureus infections have focused on MRSA bacteremia.
Objective.
To describe risk factors associated with methicillin resistance among S. aureus infections at different anatomic sites.
Methods.
We collected information on the demographic and clinical characteristics of patients examined at the Atlanta Veterans Affairs Medical Center with S. aureus infections during the period from June 2007 through May 2008. We used multivariate logistic regression to describe factors significantly associated with methicillin resistance.
Results.
There were 568 cases of S. aureus infection among 528 patients. We identified 352 cases (62%) of MRSA infection and 216 cases (38%) of methicillin-sensitive S. aureus infection. The adjusted odds of methicillin resistance were higher among infections that occurred among patients who had a prior history of MRSA infection (odds ratio [OR], 3.9 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 2.3–6.4]) or resided in a long-term care facility during the past 12 months (OR, 2.0 [95% CI, 1.0-4.0]) but were lower for infections that occurred among patients who had undergone a biopsy procedure during the past 12 months (OR, 0.7 [95% CI, 0.6-0.9]). Most cases of infection were community-onset infections (523 [92%] of 568 cases), and about one-half (278 [49%]) were not healthcare associated.
Conclusions.
Compared with previous studies of methicillin resistance among patients with S. aureus bacteremia, we found similar factors to be associated with methicillin resistance among S. aureus isolates recovered from more diverse anatomic sites of infection. Of note, nearly one-half of our cases of MRSA infection were not healthcare associated.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.