2 results
Surveillance of Healthcare-Associated Bloodstream and Urinary Tract Infections in a National Level Network of Indian Hospitals
- Purva Mathur, Paul Malpiedi, Kamini Walia, Rajesh Malhotra, Padmini Srikantiah, Omika Katoch, Sonal Katyal, Surbhi Khurana, Mahesh Chandra Misra, Sunil Gupta, Subodh Kumar, Sushma Sagar, Naveet Vig, Pramod Garg, Arti Kapil, Manoj Sahu, Arunaloke Chakrabarti, Pallab Ray, Manisha Biswal, Neelam Taneja, Priscilla Rupali, Vellore Binila Chacko, Joy Sarojini Michael, Veeraraghavan Balaji, Camilla Rodrigues, Vijaya Lakshmi Nag, Vibhor Tak, Vimala Venkatesh, Chiranjay Mukhopadhyay, KE Vandana, Muralidhar Varma, Vijayshri Deotale, Ruchita Attal, Kanne Padmaja, Chand Wattal, Neeraj Goel, Sanjay Bhattacharya, Tadepalli Karuna, Saurabh Saigal, Bijayini Behera, Sanjeev Singh, MA Thirunarayan, Reema Nath, Raja Ray, Sujata Baveja, Mammen Chandy, Sudipta Mukherjee, Manas Roy, Gaurav Goel, Swagata Tripathy, Satyajeet Misra, Anupam Dey, Tushar Mishra, Hirak Raj, Bashir Fomda, Gulnaz Bashir, Shaista Nazir, Sulochana Devi, Khuraijam Ranjana Devi, Langpoklakpam Chaoba Singh, Padma Das, Anudita Bhargava, Ujjwala Gaikwad, Neeta Khandelwal, Geeta Vaghela, Tanvi Sukharamwala, Prachi Verma, Mamta Lamba, Shristi Jain, Prithwis Bhattacharyya, Anil Phukan, Clarissa Lyngdoh, Rajeev Sharma, Rajni Gaind, Rushika Saksena, Lata Kapoor, Neil Gupta, Aditya Sharma, Daniel VanderEnde, Anoop Velayudhan, Valan Siromany, Kayla Laserson, Randeep Guleria
-
- Journal:
- Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology / Volume 41 / Issue S1 / October 2020
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 02 November 2020, pp. s398-s399
- Print publication:
- October 2020
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Background: Healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) are a major global threat to patient safety. Systematic surveillance is crucial for understanding HAI rates and antimicrobial resistance trends and to guide infection prevention and control (IPC) activities based on local epidemiology. In India, no standardized national HAI surveillance system was in place before 2017. Methods: Public and private hospitals from across 21 states in India were recruited to participate in an HAI surveillance network. Baseline assessments followed by trainings ensured that basic microbiology and IPC implementation capacity existed at all sites. Standardized surveillance protocols for central-line–associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) and catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTIs) were modified from the NHSN for the Indian context. IPC nurses were trained to implement surveillance protocols. Data were reported through a locally developed web portal. Standardized external data quality checks were performed to assure data quality. Results: Between May 2017 and April 2019, 109 ICUs from 37 hospitals (29 public and 8 private) enrolled in the network, of which 33 were teaching hospitals with >500 beds. The network recorded 679,109 patient days, 212,081 central-line days, and 387,092 urinary catheter days. Overall, 4,301 bloodstream infection (BSI) events and 1,402 urinary tract infection (UTI) events were reported. The network CLABSI rate was 9.4 per 1,000 central-line days and the CAUTI rate was 3.4 per 1,000 catheter days. The central-line utilization ratio was 0.31 and the urinary catheter utilization ratio was 0.57. Moreover, 3,542 (73%) of 4,742 pathogens reported from BSIs and 868 (53%) of 1,644 pathogens reported from UTIs were gram negative. Also, 1,680 (26.3%) of all 6,386 pathogens reported were Enterobacteriaceae. Of 1,486 Enterobacteriaceae with complete antibiotic susceptibility testing data reported, 832 (57%) were carbapenem resistant. Of 951 Enterobacteriaceae subjected to colistin broth microdilution testing, 62 (7%) were colistin resistant. The surveillance platform identified 2 separate hospital-level HAI outbreaks; one caused by colistin-resistant K. pneumoniae and another due to Burkholderia cepacia. Phased expansion of surveillance to additional hospitals continues. Conclusions: HAI surveillance was successfully implemented across a national network of diverse hospitals using modified NHSN protocols. Surveillance data are being used to understand HAI burden and trends at the facility and national levels, to inform public policy, and to direct efforts to implement effective hospital IPC activities. This network approach to HAI surveillance may provide lessons to other countries or contexts with limited surveillance capacity.
Funding: None
Disclosures: None
COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS OF LAPAROSCOPIC VERSUS MINILAPAROTOMY CHOLECYSTECTOMY FOR GALLSTONE DISEASE: A Randomized Trial
- Anurag Srivastava, Guddanti Srinivas, Mahesh Chandra Misra, Chandrakant S. Pandav, Vuthaluru Seenu, Amit Goyal
-
- Journal:
- International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care / Volume 17 / Issue 4 / October 2001
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 May 2002, pp. 497-502
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Objective: To evaluate the total cost of minilaparotomy cholecystectomy (MC) and laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and perform a cost-effectiveness (CE) analysis.
Methods: One hundred adult subjects with painful gallstone disease were randomized: 59 cases for LC and 41 cases for MC. Patients with gallstones shown on ultrasound with normal common bile duct and no history of icterus were included after an informed consent. Cases with acute cholecystitis and raised alkaline phosphatase were excluded. LC was performed using CO2 insufflation and a Storz 2D video camera. MC was done by transverse rectus cutting incision. Outcome was coded as success or failure. Success was defined as operation without injury to bile duct, viscera or vessels, minimal pain and discomfort at 4 weeks, no wound infection up to 4 weeks, and resumption of work within 2 weeks of operation. The total cost of each case included cost of investigations, cost of disposable articles for operation, cost of drugs, cost of hospital stay, and cost of operation including anesthesia. LC and MC were done with reusable instruments. A “societal viewpoint” has been taken in the cost calculations.
Results: There were 50/59 successful outcomes in LC and 15/40 outcomes in MC group. Total cost for LC was 386,769 rupees (Rs) and for MC was Rs 205,041. CE in LC was Rs 7,735 and in MC was Rs 13,669. Incremental CE ratio comparing LC with MC was 3,028.33.
Conclusion: LC is a more cost-effective method for treatment of gallstone disease.