4.5 Article

Four country healthcare associated infection prevalence survey 2006: risk factor analysis

Journal

JOURNAL OF HOSPITAL INFECTION
Volume 69, Issue 3, Pages 249-257

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhin.2008.04.021

Keywords

healthcare-associated infection; risk factors; primary bloodstream infection; pneumonia; surgical site infection; urinary tract infection; specialty

Funding

  1. Department of Health, England
  2. Welsh Healthcare Associated Infection Programme
  3. Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety, Northern Ireland
  4. The Health Service Executive, Republic of Ireland

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Point prevalence surveys are useful in detecting changes in the pattern of healthcare-associated infection (HCAI). In 2004 the Hospital Infection Society was asked to conduct a third national. prevalence survey, which included England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. A similar but not identical survey was carried out in Scotland. Data were collected on standardised forms using Centres for Disease Control. and Prevention definitions. This report considers associations with a wide range of risk factors for all HCAI and for four main categories. The overall prevalence rate of HCAI was 7.6% and increased significantly with age. All risk factors considered were associated with highly significantly increased risk of HCAI, except recent peripheral IV catheter and other Madder instrumentation use. Primary bloodstream infection (PBSI) was associated with antibiotic, central, intravenous catheter and parenteral nutrition use. Pneumonia was associated with antibiotic, central catheter, parenteral nutrition use, mechanical. ventilation and current peripheral catheter use. Surgical, site infection was associated with recent surgery, antibiotic and central catheter use, mechanical, ventilation and parenteral nutrition.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available