Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-g4j75 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-11T02:58:13.607Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

How to Survey Nosocomial Infections

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Petra Gastmeier ,
Dorit Sohr ,
Heinz-Michael Just ,
Alfred Nassauer ,
Franz Daschner  and
Henning Rüden
Petra Gastmeier*
Affiliation:
Institute of Hygiene, Free University of Berlin, Berlin, Germany
Dorit Sohr
Affiliation:
Institute of Hygiene, Free University of Berlin, Berlin, Germany
Heinz-Michael Just
Affiliation:
Institute for Medical Microbiology and Clinical Epidemiology, Hospital Nürnberg, Berlin, Germany
Alfred Nassauer
Affiliation:
Robert Koch-Institute, Berlin, Germany
Franz Daschner
Affiliation:
Institute of Environmental Medicine and Hospital Hygiene, Albert Ludwigs University, Freiburg, Germany
Henning Rüden
Affiliation:
Institute of Hygiene, Free University of Berlin, Berlin, Germany
*
Institute of Hygiene, Free University Berlin, Heubnerweg 6–Haus II, 14059 Berlin, Germany
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Many surveillance methods for nosocomial infections (NIs) have been put forward in the literature, and all have their advantages and disadvantages. Different surveillance methods are useful, depending on whether the objective of surveillance is only to increase sensitivity to infection control problems and to identify areas with possible infection control problems; to confirm a possible infection control problem through comparison with other units or departments; or to use surveillance data for identifying the sources of infections. Furthermore, time effectiveness is a major point in selecting the most appropriate method, particularly the method for case identification. In units or departments with a high level of NI, even highly time-consuming surveillance methods may be ultimately time-effective; in units or departments with a lower level of NI, the time-effectiveness depends on the time necessary for case identification. Close liaison with staff in the units is a sine qua non for the success of all surveillance activities

Type
Reviews
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 21 , Issue 6 , June 2000 , pp. 366 - 370
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 2000

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. Abrutyn, EA, Talbot, GH. Surveillance strategies: a primer. Infect Control 1987;8:459–464.Google Scholar
2. Brachman, PS. Nosocomial infections surveillance. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1993;14:194–196.Google Scholar
3. Emmerson, M. Surveillance strategies for nosocomial infections. Curr Opin Infect Dis 1995;8:272–274.Google Scholar
4. Pottinger, JM, Herwaldt, LA, Perl, TM. Basics of surveillance—an overview. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1997;18:513–527.Google Scholar
5. Roy, M-C, Perl, TM. Basics of surgical-site infection surveillance. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1997;18:659–668.Google Scholar
6. Gaynes, R, Horan, T. Surveillance of nosocomial infections. In: Mayhall, CG, ed. Hospital Epidemiology and Infection Control. Philadelphia, PA: Williams & Wilkins; 1997.Google Scholar
7. French, GL, Wong, SL, Cheng, AFB, Donnan, S. Repeated prevalence surveys for monitoring effectiveness of hospital infection control. Lancet 1989;28:1021–1023.Google Scholar
8. Weinstein, J, Mazon, D, Pantelick, E, Reagan-Cirincione, P, Dembry, L, Hierholzer, W.A decade of prevalence surveys in a tertiary-care center: trends in nosocomial infection rates, device utilization, and patient acuity. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1999;20:543–548.Google Scholar
9. Garner, JS, Emori, WR, Horan, TC, Hughes, JM. CDC definitions for nosocomial infections. Am J Infect Control 1988;16:128–140.Google Scholar
10. Horan, TC, Gaynes, RP, Martone, WJ, Jarvis, WR, Emori, TG. CDC definitions of surgical site infections: a modification of CDC definitions of surgical wound infections. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1992;13:606–608.Google Scholar
11. Gastmeier, P, Kampf, G, Wischnewski, N, Hauer, T, Schulgen, G, Schumacher, M, et al. Prevalence of nosocomial infections in representatively selected German hospitals. J Hosp Infect 1998;38:37–49.Google Scholar
12. Gastmeier, P, Sohr, D, Rath, A, Forster, D, Wischnewski, N, Lacour, M, et al. Repeated prevalence investigations on nosocomial infections for continuous surveillance. J Hosp Infect. In press.Google Scholar
13. Emori, TG, Culver, DH, Horan, TC, Jarvis, WR, White, JW, Olson, DR, et al. National nosocomial infection surveillance system (NNIS): description of surveillance methodology. Am J Infect Control 1991;19:19–35.Google Scholar
14. Culver, D. Methods of comparing nosocomial infection rates. In: Program and Abstracts of the Sixth Annual Scientific Meeting for the Society of Healthcare Epidemiology of America. April 21-23, 1996; Washington, DC.Google Scholar
15. Civetta, J, Hudson-Civetta, J, Ball, S. Decreasing catheter-related infection and hospital costs by continuous quality improvement. Crit Care Med 1996;24:1660–1665.Google Scholar
16. Dumigan, D, Kohan, C, Fikrig, M, Reed, C. Utilizing National Nosocomial Infection System Data to improve urinary tract infection rates and catheter utilization in three intensive care units. Association of Practitioners in Infection Control 24th Annual Educational Conference and International Meeting. New Orleans, LA Am J Infect Control 1998;25:168.Google Scholar
17. Kelleghan, SI, Salemi, C, Padilla, S, McCord, M, Mermilliod, G, Canola, T, et al. An effective continuous quality improvement approach to the prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia. Am J Infect Control 1993;21:322–330.Google Scholar
18. Beck-Sague, C, Jarvis, WR, Martone, WJ. Outbreak investigations. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1997;18:138–145.Google Scholar
19. Jarvis, W, Zaza, S. Investigation of outbreaks. In: Mayhall, CG, ed. Hospital Epidemiology and Infection Control. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 1999:111–120.Google Scholar
20. Glenister, HM, Taylor, LJ, Bartlett, CLR, Cooke, EM, Sedgwick, JA, Mackintosk, CA. An evaluation of surveillance methods for detecting infections in hospital inpatients. J Hosp Infect 1993;23:229–242.Google Scholar
21. Evans, RS, Larsen, RA, Burke, JP Gardner, R, Meier, FA, Jacobson, JA, et al. Computer surveillance of hospital acquired infections and antibiotic use. JAMA 1986;256:1007–1011.Google Scholar
22. Teare, ET, Peacock, A. The development of an infection control nurse program in a district hospital. J Hosp Infect 1996;34:267–278.Google Scholar