Sylvie Touveneau

Effectiveness of a hospital-wide programme to improve compliance with hand hygiene

BACKGROUND Hand hygiene prevents cross infection in hospitals, but compliance with recommended instructions is commonly poor. We attempted to promote hand hygiene by implementing a hospital-wide programme, with special emphasis on bedside, alcohol-based hand disinfection. We measured nosocomial infections in parallel. METHODS We monitored the overall compliance with hand hygiene during routine patient care in a teaching hospital in Geneva, Switzerland, before and during implementation of a hand-hygiene campaign. Seven hospital-wide observational surveys were done twice yearly from December, 1994, to December, 1997. Secondary outcome measures were nosocomial infection rates, attack rates of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), and consumption of handrub disinfectant. FINDINGS We observed more than 20,000 opportunities for hand hygiene. Compliance improved progressively from 48% in 1994, to 66% in 1997 (p<0.001). Although recourse to handwashing with soap and water remained stable, frequency of hand disinfection substantially increased during the study period (p<0.001). This result was unchanged after adjustment for known risk factors of poor adherence. Hand hygiene improved significantly among nurses and nursing assistants, but remained poor among doctors. During the same period, overall nosocomial infection decreased (prevalence of 16.9% in 1994 to 9.9% in 1998; p=0.04), MRSA transmission rates decreased (2.16 to 0.93 episodes per 10,000 patient-days; p<0.001), and the consumption of alcohol-based handrub solution increased from 3.5 to 15.4 L per 1000 patient-days between 1993 and 1998 (p<0.001). INTERPRETATION The campaign produced a sustained improvement in compliance with hand hygiene, coinciding with a reduction of nosocomial infections and MRSA transmission. The promotion of bedside, antiseptic handrubs largely contributed to the increase in compliance.

Impact of a prevention strategy targeted at vascular-access care on incidence of infections acquired in intensive care.

BACKGROUND Intravascular devices are a leading cause of nosocomial infection. Specific prevention strategies and improved guidelines for the use of intravascular devices can decrease the rate of infection; however, the impact of a combination of these strategies on rates of vascular-access infection in intensive-care units (ICUs) is not known. We implemented a multiple-approach prevention programme to decrease the occurrence of vascular-access infection in an 18-bed medical ICU at a tertiary centre. METHODS 3154 critically ill patients, admitted between October, 1995, and November, 1997, were included in a cohort study with longitudinal assessment of an overall catheter-care policy targeted at the reduction of vascular-access infections and based on an educational campaign for vascular-access insertion and on device use and care. Incidence of ICU-acquired infections was measured by means of on-site surveillance. FINDINGS 613 infections occurred in 353 patients (19.4 infections per 100 admissions). The incidence density of exit-site catheter infection was 9.2 episodes per 1000 patient-days before the intervention, and 3.3 episodes per 1000 patient-days afterwards (relative risk 0.36 [95% CI 0.20-0.63]). Corresponding rates for bloodstream infection were 11.3 and 3.8 episodes per 1000 patient-days, respectively (0.33 [0.20-0.56]) due to decreased rates of both microbiologically documented infections and clinical sepsis. Rates of respiratory and urinary-tract infections remained unchanged, whereas those of skin or mucous-membrane infections decreased from 11.4 to 7.0 episodes per 1000 patient-days (0.62 [0.41-0.93]). Overall, the incidence of nosocomial infections decreased from 52.4 to 34.0 episodes per 1000 patient-days (0.65 [0.54-0.78]). INTERPRETATION A multiple-approach prevention strategy, targeted at the insertion and maintenance of vascular access, can decrease rates of vascular-access infections and can have a substantial impact on the overall incidence of ICU-acquired infections.

Ventilator-associated pneumonia: caveats for benchmarking.

carries a low event rate of VAP in the described population. Considering that a substantial number of our patients are immunocompromised the results may be even more impressive. Whether our preventive strategies are perhaps ‘the best’ is open for discussion. Our study could have suffered from several limitations. Firstly, in our experience, most pulmonary infiltrates are not caused by pneumonia but rather by oedema or atelectasis. A low clinical likelihood of VAP encourages and reinforces a policy to withhold diagnostic procedures in patients with ‘little’ clinical evidence of infection [2]. Secondly, seasonal variation or the applied study design (3 month follow up from April to June) may have influenced the low incidence of VAP. Thirdly, although our nursing staff has specific knowledge of non-pharmacological VAP preventive measures, it is unclear whether any of our non-pharmacological measures or combination of measures really impact on outcome. Despite the low infection rate, our findings do not add anything new to the field of nosocomial infections. In fact, any given result is due to chance alone. It might well be that there is a difference in preventive measures but that this difference cannot be detected with statistical certainty. Longitudinal surveys with continuous risk estimation are often initiated to allow targeting treatments to those with the highest risk tailored to the characteristics of the individual ICU [3]. But due to methodological weakness, almost every single unit observational study on VAP is underpowered, such a study does not demonstrate the value of local measures and distinguishes associations. In our view the emphasis of quality control programs should be on structural and process indicators instead of on outcome parameters. Only prospective, randomised trials conducted to compare preventive measures with other strategies with clearly defined patient populations and disease stages can identify valuable preventive measures. Such trials should be well powered, and therefore multi-centered by design, with extreme attention and strict adherence to the protocols that would be compared, their results may help in formulating guidelines to be generally applied. In conclusion, discrepancies between ICUs may reflect: effectiveness of local VAP diagnosis and prevention strategies, the prevalence of resistant isolates, patient to staff ratio, the patient population examined, the way of reporting VAP rates, and other unknown factors. Data of local surveillance studies should be read as process indicators. Due to limited sample size most of these studies are insufficiently powered and the results do not permit a definitive conclusion. Failure to recognize these issues will lead to compromised benchmarking between units [1].

Secular trends in antibiotic use among neonates: 2001-2008

Background: Few data exist on time trends of antibiotic consumption among neonates. Objectives: To assess secular trends in antibiotic consumption in the context of an antibiotic policy and the effect of antibiotic use on the development of antimicrobial resistance and outcome among neonates in a single center. Methods: We performed a prospective cohort study between 2001 and 2008 to monitor antibiotic consumption among neonates. In parallel, we initiated a policy to shorten antibiotic therapy for clinical sepsis and for infections caused by coagulase-negative staphylococci and to discontinue preemptive treatment when blood cultures were negative. Time trend analyses for antibiotic use and mortality were performed. Results: In total, 1096 of 4075 neonates (26.7%) received 1281 courses of antibiotic treatment. Overall, days of therapy were 360 per 1000 patient-days. Days of therapy per 1000 patient-days decreased yearly by 2.8% (P < 0.001). Antibiotic-days to treat infections decreased yearly by 6.5% (P = 0.01) while antibiotic-days for preemptive treatment increased by 3.4% per year (P = 0.03). Mean treatment duration for confirmed infections decreased by 2.9% per year (P < 0.001). No significant upward trend was observed for infection-associated mortality. Of 271 detected healthcare-associated infections, 156 (57.6%) were microbiologically documented. The most frequent pathogens were coagulase-negative staphylococci (48.5%) followed by Escherichia coli (13.5%) and enterococci (9.4%). Rates for extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing microorganisms and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus remained low. Conclusions: Shortening antibiotic therapy and reducing preemptive treatment resulted in a moderate reduction of antibiotic use in the neonatal intensive care unit and did not increase mortality.

Hospital-wide multidisciplinary, multimodal intervention programme to reduce central venous catheter-associated bloodstream infection

Central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) is the major complication of central venous catheters (CVC). The aim of the study was to test the effectiveness of a hospital-wide strategy on CLABSI reduction. Between 2008 and 2011, all CVCs were observed individually and hospital-wide at a large university-affiliated, tertiary care hospital. CVC insertion training started from the 3rd quarter and a total of 146 physicians employed or newly entering the hospital were trained in simulator workshops. CVC care started from quarter 7 and a total of 1274 nurses were trained by their supervisors using a web-based, modular, e-learning programme. The study included 3952 patients with 6353 CVCs accumulating 61,366 catheter-days. Hospital-wide, 106 patients had 114 CLABSIs with a cumulative incidence of 1.79 infections per 100 catheters. We observed a significant quarterly reduction of the incidence density (incidence rate ratios [95% confidence interval]: 0.92 [0.88–0.96]; P<0.001) after adjusting for multiple confounders. The incidence densities (n/1000 catheter-days) in the first and last study year were 2.3/1000 and 0.7/1000 hospital-wide, 1.7/1000 and 0.4/1000 in the intensive care units, and 2.7/1000 and 0.9/1000 in non-intensive care settings, respectively. Median time-to-infection was 15 days (Interquartile range, 8-22). Our findings suggest that clinically relevant reduction of hospital-wide CLABSI was reached with a comprehensive, multidisciplinary and multimodal quality improvement programme including aspects of behavioural change and key principles of good implementation practice. This is one of the first multimodal, multidisciplinary, hospital-wide training strategies successfully reducing CLABSI.

Enhanced performance feedback and patient participation to improve hand hygiene compliance of health-care workers in the setting of established multimodal promotion: a single-centre, cluster randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND Hand hygiene compliance of health-care workers remains suboptimal despite standard multimodal promotion, and evidence for the effectiveness of novel interventions is urgently needed. We aimed to assess the effect of enhanced performance feedback and patient participation on hand hygiene compliance in the setting of multimodal promotion. METHODS We did a single-centre, cluster randomised controlled trial at University of Geneva Hospitals (Geneva, Switzerland). All wards hosting adult, lucid patients, and all health-care workers and patients in these wards, were eligible. After a 15-month baseline period, eligible wards were assigned by computer-generated block randomisation (1:1:1), stratified by the type of ward, to one of three groups: control, enhanced performance feedback, or enhanced performance feedback plus patient participation. Standard multimodal hand hygiene promotion was done hospital-wide throughout the study. The primary outcome was hand hygiene compliance of health-care workers (according to the WHO Five Moments of Hand Hygiene) at the opportunity level, measured by direct observation (20-min sessions) by 12 validated infection control nurses, with each ward audited at least once every 3 months. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN43599478. FINDINGS We randomly assigned 67 wards to the control group (n=21), enhanced performance feedback (n=24), or enhanced performance feedback plus patient participation (n=22) on May 19, 2010. One ward in the control group became a high-dependency unit and was excluded from analysis. During 1367 observation sessions, 12 579 hand hygiene opportunities were recorded. Between the baseline period (April 1, 2009, to June 30, 2010) and the intervention period (July 1, 2010, to June 30, 2012), mean hand hygiene compliance increased from 66% (95% CI 62-70) to 73% (70-77) in the control group (odds ratio [OR] 1·41, 95% CI 1·21-1·63), from 65% (62-69) to 75% (72-77) in the enhanced performance feedback group (1·61, 1·41-1·84), and from 66% (62-70) to 77% (74-80) in the enhanced performance feedback plus patient participation group (1·73, 1·51-1·98). The absolute difference in compliance attributable to interventions was 3 percentage points (95% CI 0-7; p=0·19) for the enhanced performance feedback group and 4 percentage points (1-8; p=0·048) for the enhanced performance feedback plus patient participation group. Hand hygiene compliance remained significantly higher than baseline in all three groups (OR 1·21 [1·00-1·47] vs 1·38 [1·19-1·60] vs 1·36 [1·18-1·57]) during the post-intervention follow-up (Jan 1, 2013, to Dec 31, 2014). INTERPRETATION Hand hygiene compliance improved in all study groups, and neither intervention had a clinically significant effect compared with control. Improvement in control wards might reflect cross-contamination, highlighting challenges with randomised trials of behaviour change. FUNDING Swiss National Science Foundation.

Individualized Catheter Surveillance among Neonates: A Prospective, 8‐Year, Single‐Center Experience

OBJECTIVE To monitor trends in central line-associated bloodstream infections and clinical sepsis (CLABICS) among neonates and to determine risk factors for infection, especially dwell time. DESIGN Prospective, single-center cohort study conducted from 2001 through 2008. SETTING University-affiliated tertiary care center. METHODS Individualized surveillance of catheter use and CLABICS episodes was conducted. Data were obtained via regular on-site visits made 3 times a week. Trends over time were estimated by Poisson regression, and risk factor analysis was conducted using a Cox proportional hazards model and logistic regression. RESULTS In all, 1,124 neonates were exposed to 2,210 central lines for a total of 12,746 catheter-days and 11,467 catheter-days at risk. The median duration of catheter use was 8 (interquartile range, 5-11) days for peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) and 4 (interquartile range, 2-6) days for umbilical catheters; 102 CLABICS episodes were detected. The median time to infection was 7 days. Incidence densities were 8.5 CLABICS episodes per 1,000 catheter-days at risk and 8.0 CLABICS episodes per 1,000 catheter-days. The highest rates were identified among neonates weighing 750 g or lower (14.9 CLABICS episodes per 1,000 catheter days at risk) and for PICCs (13.2 CLABICS episodes per 1,000 catheter days at risk). Catheter dwell time was associated with CLABICS for all umbilical catheters (odds ratio [OR], 1.2 per day of use [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.1-1.3]; P < .001) and for PICCs for up to 7 days (OR, 1.2 [95% CI, 1.1-1.4]; P = .041), but not thereafter (OR, 1.0 [95% CI, 0.9-1.1]; P = .90). CONCLUSION Catheter dwell time is a risk factor for CLABICS during the first 7 days, irrespective of catheter type. After 7 days, PICCs are less likely to become infected.

Implementation of infection control best practice in intensive care units throughout Europe: a mixed-method evaluation study

BackgroundThe implementation of evidence-based infection control practices is essential, yet challenging for healthcare institutions worldwide. Although acknowledged that implementation success varies with contextual factors, little is known regarding the most critical specific conditions within the complex cultural milieu of varying economic, political, and healthcare systems. Given the increasing reliance on unified global schemes to improve patient safety and healthcare effectiveness, research on this topic is needed and timely. The ‘InDepth’ work package of the European FP7 Pr evention o f H ospital I nfections b y I ntervention and T raining (PROHIBIT) consortium aims to assess barriers and facilitators to the successful implementation of catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) prevention in intensive care units (ICU) across several European countries.MethodsWe use a qualitative case study approach in the ICUs of six purposefully selected acute care hospitals among the 15 participants in the PROHIBIT CRBSI intervention study. For sensitizing schemes we apply the theory of diffusion of innovation, published implementation frameworks, sensemaking, and new institutionalism. We conduct interviews with hospital health providers/agents at different organizational levels and ethnographic observations, and conduct rich artifact collection, and photography during two rounds of on-site visits, once before and once one year into the intervention. Data analysis is based on grounded theory. Given the challenge of different languages and cultures, we enlist the help of local interpreters, allot two days for site visits, and perform triangulation across multiple data sources.Qualitative measures of implementation success will consider the longitudinal interaction between the initiative and the institutional context. Quantitative outcomes on catheter-related bloodstream infections and performance indicators from another work package of the consortium will produce a final mixed-methods report.ConclusionA mixed-methods study of this scale with longitudinal follow-up is unique in the field of infection control. It highlights the ‘Why’ and ‘How’ of best practice implementation, revealing key factors that determine success of a uniform intervention in the context of several varying cultural, economic, political, and medical systems across Europe. These new insights will guide future implementation of more tailored and hence more successful infection control programs.Trial registrationTrial number: PROHIBIT-241928 (FP7 reference number)

Pseudomonas aeruginosa outbreak in a pediatric intensive care unit linked to a humanitarian organization residential center

Background: Pseudomonas aeruginosa commonly colonizes the hospital environment. Between April 2006 and September 2008, we investigated an outbreak of P. aeruginosa infection occurring in a pediatric intensive care unit. We conducted epidemiologic and molecular investigations to identify the source of the outbreak. Methods: Retrospective case finding; surveillance cultures of patients and environmental sites; admission screening; case-control study; and molecular typing. Patient and Setting: Infants and children in a pediatric intensive care unit of a tertiary-care institution. Results: Thirty-seven cases of P. aeruginosa infection or colonization were detected between April 2006 and September 2008, including 3 fatal bloodstream infections. A closely-related strain was detected in 4 residents of a humanitarian nongovernmental organization (NGO) center who developed an infection, from 4 additional residents upon their hospital admission, and from a sink drain at the NGO residential center. NGO recipients represented 65% (24/37) of the total number of cases of P. aeruginosa colonization or infection during the outbreak period. Investigation at the residential center showed widespread contamination of the sewage system (10/14 sinks and shower drains, 70%) and a high prevalence (38%) of P. aeruginosa carriage among children. Conclusions: These findings suggest that the probable cause of the outbreak was the contamination of the NGO residential center with further nosocomial transmission after admission, and highlight the importance of considering external sources when investigating hospital outbreaks.

Implementing infection prevention practices across European hospitals: an in-depth qualitative assessment

Objective The Prevention of Hospital Infections by Intervention and Training (PROHIBIT) project included a cluster-randomised, stepped wedge, controlled study to evaluate multiple strategies to prevent catheter-related bloodstream infection. We report an in-depth investigation of the main barriers, facilitators and contextual factors relevant to successfully implementing these strategies in European acute care hospitals. Methods Qualitative comparative case study in 6 of the 14 European PROHIBIT hospitals. Data were collected through interviews with key stakeholders and ethnographic observations conducted during 2-day site visits, before and 1 year into the PROHIBIT intervention. Qualitative measures of implementation success included intervention fidelity, adaptation to local context and satisfaction with the intervention programme. Results Three meta-themes emerged related to implementation success: ‘implementation agendas’, ‘resources’ and ‘boundary-spanning’. Hospitals established unique implementation agendas that, while not always aligned with the project goals, shaped subsequent actions. Successful implementation required having sufficient human and material resources and dedicated change agents who helped make the intervention an institutional priority. The salary provided for a dedicated study nurse was a key facilitator. Personal commitment of influential individuals and boundary spanners helped overcome resource restrictions and intrainstitutional segregation. Conclusion This qualitative study revealed patterns across cases that were associated with successful implementation. Consideration of the intervention–context relation was indispensable to understanding the observed outcomes.