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.
We analyzed efficacy of a centralized surveillance infection prevention (CSIP) program in a healthcare system on healthcare-associated infection (HAI) rates amid the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. HAI rates were variable in CSIP and non-CSIP facilities. Central-line–associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI), C. difficile infection (CSI), and surgical-site infection (SSI) rates were negatively correlated with COVID-19 intensity in CSIP facilities.
To develop, implement, and evaluate the effectiveness of a unique centralized surveillance infection prevention (CSIP) program.
Design:
Observational quality improvement project.
Setting:
An integrated academic healthcare system.
Intervention:
The CSIP program comprises senior infection preventionists who are responsible for healthcare-associated infection (HAI) surveillance and reporting, allowing local infection preventionists (LIPs) a greater portion of their time to non-surveillance patient safety activities. Four CSIP team members accrued HAI responsibilities at 8 facilities.
Methods:
We evaluated the effectiveness of the CSIP program using 4 measures: recovery of LIP time, efficiency of surveillance activities by LIPs and CSIP staff, surveys characterizing LIP perception of their effectiveness in HAI reduction, and nursing leaders’ perception of LIP effectiveness.
Results:
The amount of time spent by LIP teams on HAI surveillance was highly variable, while CSIP time commitment and efficiency was steady. Post-CSIP implementation, 76.9% of LIPs agreed that they spend adequate time on inpatient units, compared to 15.4% pre-CSIP; LIPs also reported more time to allot to non-surveillance activities. Nursing leaders reported greater satisfaction with LIP involvement with HAI reduction practices.
Conclusion:
CSIP programs are a little-reported strategy to ease burden on LIPs with reallocation of HAI surveillance. The analyses presented here will aid health systems in anticipating the benefit of CSIP programs.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.