Hostname: page-component-7f64f4797f-m2b9p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-11-09T15:40:25.383Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Surveillance for Quality Assessment: II. Surveillance for Noninfectious Processes: Back to Basics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 June 2016

Allison McGeer ,
William Crede  and
Walter J. Hierholzer Jr.
Allison McGeer
Affiliation:
Department of Hospital Epidemiology, Yale-New Haven Hospital, New Haven, Connecticut
William Crede
Affiliation:
Department of Quality Assurance, Yale-New Haven Hospital, New Haven, Connecticut
Walter J. Hierholzer Jr.*
Affiliation:
Department of Hospital Epidemiology, Yale-New Haven Hospital, New Haven, Connecticut
*
Department of Epidemiology, Yale-New Haven Hospital, New Haven, CT 06504
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The first article in this series reviewed the type of surveillance currently used by most of the infection surveillance and control programs in acute care hospitals in the United States. Five components were identified as critical to the widespread acceptance and continuing success of this surveillance methodology: targeting of events (diseases); early development of standardized definitions; wide acceptance of the criteria for these definitions; advocacy, leadership and education in methodology; and a high level of effectiveness in program practice. Using the framework of these key components, this article will discuss the potential for the application of similar methodology to noninfectious nosocomial adverse events and explore some current successes and problems associated with surveillance for such events.

Information

Type
Topics in Clinical Epidemiology
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 11 , Issue 1 , January 1990 , pp. 36 - 41
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 1990 

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1. Credé, W, Hierholzer, WJ. Surveillance for quality assessment: I. surveillance in infection control. Infect Control How Epidemiol. 1989:10:470–474.Google Scholar
2. Eickhoff, TC, Brachman, PS, Bennett, JV, et al. Surveillance of nosocomial infections in community hospitals. I. surveillance methods, effectiveness and initial results. J Infect Dis. 1969;120:305–316.Google Scholar
3. Donabedian, A. Explorations in Quality Assessment and Monitoring. Vol I. Ann Arbor: Health Administration Press; 1980:1–71.Google Scholar
4. Bliershach, CM. Quality assurance in health care: current challenges and future directions. QRB. 1988;14:315–319.Google Scholar
5. Reddy, MP. Decubitus ulcers: principles of prevention and management. Geriatrics. 1983;38(7):55–61.Google Scholar
6. Allman, RM, Laprade, CA, Noel, LB, et al. Pressure sores among hospitalized patients. Ann Intern Med. 1986; 105:337–342.Google Scholar
7. Moody, BL, Fanale, JE, Thompson, M, et al. Impact of staff education on pressure sore development in elderly hospitalized patients. Arch Intern Med. 1988;148:2241–2243.Google Scholar
8. Credé, W, Hierholzer, WJ. Mortality rates as a quality indicator: a simple answer to a complex question. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1988;9:330–332.Google Scholar
9. Hebel, JR, Kessler, II, Mabuchi, K, McCarter, RJ. Assessment of hospital performance by use of death rates. JAMA. 1982;248:3131–3135.Google Scholar
10. Dubois, RW, Brook, RH. Preventable deaths: who, how often, and why? Ann Intern Med. 1988;109:582–589.Google Scholar
11. Marder, RJ. Joint Commission plans for clinical indicator development for oncology. Cancer. 1989;64(Suppl):310–313.Google Scholar
12. Hirschman, SZ, Meyers, BR, Bradbury, K, Mehl, B, Gendelman, St Kimelblatt, B. Use of antimicrobial agents in a university teaching hospital. Arch Intern Med. 1988;148:2001–2007.Google Scholar
13. Briceland, LL, Nightingale, CH, Quintiliani, R, Cooper, SW, Smith, KS. Antibiotic streamlining from combination therapy to monotherapy utilizing an interdisciplinary approach. Arch Intern Med. 1988;148:2019–2022.Google Scholar
14. Panel of the National Consensus Conference on Aspects of Cesarean Birth. Indications for cesarean section: final statement of the Panel of the National Consensus Conference on Aspects of Cesarean Birth. Can Med Assoc J. 1986;134:1348–1352.Google Scholar
15. Myers, SA, Gleicher, N. A successful program to lower cesarean section rates. N Engl J Med. 1988;319:1511–1516.Google Scholar
16. Girotti, MJ, Garrick, C, Tierney, MG, Chesnick, K, Brown, SJ. Medication administration errors in an adult intensive care unit. Heart Lung. 1987;16:449–453.Google Scholar
17. Vlncer, MJ, Murray, JM, Yuill, A, et al. Drug errors and incidents in a neonatal intensive care unit. Am J Dis Child. 1989;143:737–740.Google Scholar
18. Raju, TN, Thornton, JP, Kecskes, S, et al. Medication errors in neonatal and pediatric intensive care units. Lancet. 1989;2:374–376.Google Scholar
19. O'Leary, DS. The Joint Commission looks to the future. JAMA. 1987;258:951–952.Google Scholar
20. Donabedian, A. Criteria and standards for quality assessment and monitoring. QRB. 1986;12:99–108.Google Scholar
21. Enck, RE. A model for oncology clinical indicators. Cancer. 1989; (Suppl 1):306–309.Google Scholar
22. Gamer, JS, Jarvis, W, Emori, TG, Horan, JC, Hughes, JM. CDC definitions for nosocomial infections, 1988. Am J Infect Control. 1988;16:128–140.Google Scholar
23. Charlson, ME, MacKenzie, R, Ales, K, et al. Surveillance for postoperative myocardial infarction after noncardiac operations. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1988;167:407–414.Google Scholar
24. Mascioli, SR, Jacobs, DR, Kottke, TE. Diagnostic criteria for hospitalized acute myocardial infarction: the Minnesota experience. Int J Epidemiol. 1989;18:76–83.Google Scholar
25. Weinberg, N. Creating a culture of quality practice among physicians. QRB. 1987;13:405–410.Google Scholar
26. Haley, RW, Quade, D, Freeman, HE, Bennett, JV. The SENIC project study on the efficacy of nosocomial infection control (SENIC project). Am J Epidemiol. 1980;111:472–542.Google Scholar
27. Massanari, RM, Wilkerson, K, Streed, SA, Hierholzer, WJ. Reliability of reporting nosocomial infections in the discharge abstract and implications for receipt of revenues under prospective payment. Am J Public Health. 1987;77:561–564.Google Scholar
28. Tse, CST, Madura, AJ. An adverse drug reaction reporting program in a community hospital. QRB. 1988;14:336–340.Google Scholar
29. Evans, Rs, Larsen, RA, Burke, JP, et al. Computer surveillance of hospital-acquired infections and antibiotic use. JAMA. 1986;256:1007–1011.Google Scholar
30. Freeman, J, McGowan, JE. Methodologic issues in hospital epidemiology, I. Rates, case-finding, and interpretation. Rev Infect Dis. 1981;3:658–687.Google Scholar
31. Haley, RW, Culver, DH, Morgan, WM, White, JW, Emori, TG, Hooton, TM. Identifying patients at high risk of surgical wound infection-a simple multivariate index of patient susceptibility and wound contamination. Am J Epidemiol. 1985;121:206–216.Google Scholar
32. Fogarty, TE, Schnelle, JF, Newman, DR. Statistical quality control in nursing homes: a key indicator to evaluate patient incontinence care. QRB. 1989;15:273–278.Google Scholar
33. Morse, JM, Black, C, Oherle, K, Donahue, P. A prospective study to identify the fall-prone patient. Soc Sci Med. 1989;28:81–86.Google Scholar
34. Haley, RW, Culver, DH, White, JW, et al. The efficacy of infection surveillance and control programs in preventing nosocomial infections in U.S. hospitals. Am J Epidemiol. 1985;121:182–205.Google Scholar
35. American Society of Hospital Pharmacists. Practice standards of the ASHP 1988-89 ed. Bethesda, Maryland: ASHP; 1988:144–145.Google Scholar
36. American College of Physicians. Evaluation of patients after recent acute myocardial infarction (position paper). Ann Intern Med. 1989;110:485–488.Google Scholar
37. Cobb, MD. Evaluating medication errors. J Nurs Adm. 1986;16(4):41–44.Google Scholar