Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x24gv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-23T08:25:25.928Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Impact of an Infection Control Program on the Prevalence of Nosocomial Infections at a Tertiary Care Center in Switzerland

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Corina Ebnöther ,
Beate Tanner ,
Flavia Schmid ,
Vittoria La Rocca ,
Ivo Heinzer  and
Thomas Bregenzer
Corina Ebnöther
Affiliation:
Division for Infection Control, Kantonsspital Aarau, Switzerland
Beate Tanner
Affiliation:
Division of Infectious Diseases, Kantonsspital Aarau, Switzerland
Flavia Schmid
Affiliation:
Division of Infectious Diseases, Kantonsspital Aarau, Switzerland
Vittoria La Rocca
Affiliation:
Division for Infection Control, Kantonsspital Aarau, Switzerland
Ivo Heinzer
Affiliation:
Microbiology Laboratory, Kantonsspital Aarau, Switzerland
Thomas Bregenzer*
Affiliation:
Division of Infectious Diseases, Kantonsspital Aarau, Switzerland
*
Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Kantonsspital Aarau, 5000 Aarau, Switzerland (thomas.bregenzer@ksa.ch)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective.

To study the impact of a multimodal infection control program on the rate of nosocomial infections at a 550-bed tertiary care center.

Methods.

Before and after the implementation of an infection control program, the rate of nosocomial infection was recorded in time-interval prevalence studies. Hand hygiene compliance was studied before and after the intervention. As a surrogate marker of compliance, the amount of alcohol-based hand rub consumed before the intervention was compared with the amount consumed after the intervention. The intervention included additional staff for infection control, repeated instructions for hand hygiene, new guidelines for preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis, and isolation of patients infected or colonized with multidrug-resistant bacteria.

Results.

The rate of nosocomial infection decreased from approximately 11.7% to 6.8% in 2 years. The rate of hand hygiene compliance increased by 20.0%; it was 59.0% before the intervention and increased to 79.0% afterward. These results correlate with data on the consumption of alcohol-based hand rub, but not with data on the use of antibiotics.

Conclusion.

Within 2 years, a multimodal infection control program intervention such as this one may reduce the rate of nosocomial infection at a tertiary care center by more than one-third and improve both the quality of care and patient outcomes. It may also generate considerable savings. Therefore, such programs should be promoted not only by hospital epidemiologists but also by hospital administrators.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 29 , Issue 1 , January 2008 , pp. 38 - 43
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Semmelweis, PI. Aetiologie, Begriff und Prophylaxis des Kindbettfiebers. Pest 1861. Reprint. Leipzig: Ambrosius Barth; 1912.Google Scholar
2.Wilcox, MH, Dave, J. The cost of hospital-acquired infection and the value of infection control. J Hosp Infect 2000;45:81–84.Google Scholar
3.Wenzel, RP. The economics of nosocomial infections. J Hosp Infect 1995;31:79–87.Google Scholar
4.Zhan, C, Miller, MR. Excess length of stay, charges and mortality attributable to medical injuries during hospitalization. JAMA 2003;290:1868–1874.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Haley, WR, Culver, DH, White, JW, et al.The efficacy of infection surveillance and control programs in preventing nosocomial infections in US hospitals. Am J Epidemiol 1985;121:182–205.Google Scholar
6.Meliones, J. Saving money, saving lives. Harv Bus Rev 2000;78:57–67.Google Scholar
7.Herwaldt, LA. Ethical aspects of infection control. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1996;17:108–113.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.O'Boyle, C, Jackson, M, Henly, SJ. Staffing requirements for infection control programs in US health care facilities: Delphi project. Am J Infect Control 2002;30:321–333.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Sax, H; Swiss-NOSO, . Nationwide surveillance of nosocomial infections in Switzerland—methods and results of the Swiss Nosocomial Infection Prevalence Studies (SNIP) in 1999 and 2002 [in German]. Ther Umsch 2004;61:197–203.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Pittet, D, Tarara, D, Wenzel, P. Nosocomial bloodstream infection in critically ill patients: excess length of stay, extra costs, and attributable mortality. JAMA 1994;271:1598–1601.Google Scholar
11.Leibovici, L, Shraga, I, Drucker, M, Konigsberger, H, Samraz, Z, Pitlik, SD. The benefit of appropriate empirical antibiotic treatment in patients with bloodstream infections. J Intern Med 1998;244:379–386.Google Scholar
12.Campagne suisse d'hygiène des mains. Swisshandhygiene.campaign.2005/2006, organized by Swiss-NOSO. Available at: http.V/cclin-sudest.chu-lyon.fr/antennes/auvergne/Auvergne_journee05/Uckay_05.pdf. Accessed November 21, 2007.Google Scholar
13.Schmid, F, Ebnöther, C, Heinzer, I, Bregenzer, T. Can the infectious diseases service improve management of bloodstream infections? In: Programs and abstracts of the 46th Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy (Washington, DC). 2005:367. Abstract K-1934.Google Scholar
14.Schmid, F, Ebnöther, C, Wydler, J, Bregenzer, T. Compliance to guidelines for preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis. In: Program and abstracts of the Swiss Infection Conference (Basel, Switzerland). 2005:36. Abstract p94.Google Scholar
15.Herzlinger, RE. Why innovation in health care is so hard. Harv Bus Rev 2006;84:58–66.Google Scholar
16.Wenzel, RP. Does infection control control infections? Schweiz Med Woch-enschr 2000;130:119–121.Google Scholar
17.Cepeda, JA, Whitehouse, T, Cooper, B, et al.Isolation of patients in single rooms or cohorts to reduce spread of MRSA in intensive-care units: prospective two-centre study. Lancet 2005;365:295–304.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18.Stelfox, HT, Bates, DW, Redelmeier, DA. Safety of patients isolated for infection control. JAMA 2003;290:1899–1905.Google Scholar
19.Salaripour, M, McKernan, P, Devlin, R, et al.A multidisciplinary approach to reducing outbreaks and nosocomial MRSA in a university-affiliated hospital. Healthc Q 2006;9:54–60.Google Scholar
20.Classen, DC, Evans, RS, Pestotnik, SL, Horn, SD, Menlove, RL, Burke, JP. The timing of prophylactic administration of antibiotics and the risk of surgical-wound infection. N Engl J Med 1992;326:281–286.Google Scholar
21.Kernodle, DS, Barg, NL, Kaiser, AB. Low-level colonization of hospitalized patients with methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative Staphylococci and emergence of the organisms during surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1988;32:202–208.Google Scholar
22.Webb, AL, Flagg, RL, Fink, AS. Reducing surgical site infections through a multidisciplinary computerized process for preoperative prophylactic antibiotic administration. Am J Surg 2006;192:663–668.Google Scholar
23.Spengler, RF, Greenough, WB 3rd. Hospital costs and mortality attributed to nosocomial bacteremias. JAMA 1978;240:2455–2258.Google Scholar
24.Fluckiger, U, Zimmerli, W, Sax, H, Frei, R, Widmer, AF. Clinical impact of an infectious disease service on the management of bloodstream infection. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2000;19:493–500.Google Scholar
25.Wisplinghoff, H, Bischoff, T, Tallent, SM, Seifert, H, Wenzel, RP, Edmond, MB. Nosocomial bloodstream infections in US hospitals: analysis of 24,179 cases from a prospective nationwide surveillance study. Clin Infect Dis 2004;39:309–317.Google Scholar
26.Kirkland, KB, Briggs, JP, Trivette, SL, Wilkinson, WE, Sexton, DJ. The impact of surgical-site infections in the 1990s: attributable mortality, excess length of hospitalization, and extra costs. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1999;20:725–730.Google Scholar