Comparison of Data Collection for Healthcare-Associated Infection Surveillance in Nursing Homes

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To facilitate surveillance and describe the burden of healthcare-associated infection (HAI) in nursing homes (NHs), we compared the quality of resident-level data collected by NH personnel and external staff. DESIGN A 1-day point-prevalence survey SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS Overall, 9 nursing homes among 4 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Emerging Infection Program (EIP) sites were included in this study. METHODS NH personnel collected data on resident characteristics, clinical risk factors for HAIs, and the presence of 3 HAI screening criteria on the day of the survey. Trained EIP surveillance officers collected the same data elements via retrospective medical chart review for comparison; surveillance officers also collected available data to identify HAIs (using revised McGeer definitions). Overall agreement was calculated among residents identified by both teams with selected risk factors and HAI screening criteria. The impact of using NH personnel to collect screening criteria on HAI prevalence was assessed. RESULTS The overall prevalence of clinical risk factors among the 1,272 residents was similar between NH personnel and surveillance officers, but the level of positive agreement (residents with factors identified by both teams) varied between 39% and 87%. Surveillance officers identified 253 residents (20%) with ≥1 HAI screening criterion, resulting in 67 residents with an HAI (5.3 per 100 residents). The NH personnel identified 152 (12%) residents with ≥1 HAI screening criterion; 42 residents had an HAI (3.5 per 100 residents). CONCLUSION We identified discrepancies in resident-level data collection between surveillance officers and NH personnel, resulting in varied estimates of the HAI prevalence. These findings have important implications for the design and implementation of future HAI prevalence surveys. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2016;1440-1445.

Antimicrobials in acute and long-term care: a point in time along the way to improved use

“…This approach is able to reveal more targeted quality improvements and enables comparisons of antimicrobial use at the national, regional or local level. PPS may be particularly useful for resource-limited hospitals and long-term care facilities (LTCF) with restricted capabilities for capturing use data on a continual basis [ 5 , 6 ]. Since PPS evaluate antimicrobial use during a single time period, they need to be repeated at regular intervals to monitor trends over time.…”

Antimicrobial Use in a Cohort of US Nursing Homes, 2017

“…The other main indications for antimicrobial use were for skin and wound and respiratory tract infections. As reported elsewhere, if the survey had been performed during winter months, antimicrobial use for respiratory tract infections would likely increase. These 3 leading indications, representing the majority of antimicrobial use, mirror results reported from other countries .…”

“…Standardized data collection forms with detailed form instructions were used and developed with input from investigators for the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) Long-term Care Prevalence Survey Team and informed by a CDC pilot prevalence survey …”

Healthcare-associated infections and antimicrobial use in Belgian nursing homes: results of three point prevalence surveys between 2010 and 2016

“…Despite having access to a larger variety of data sources including direct observations and verbal reports for caretakers, NH personnel identified fewer residents with any HAI screening criteria than the surveillance team. They more often missed antimicrobial use as an HAI screening criterion [ 26 ]. Although recommended, we did not impose direct observation of residents to our participating NHs.…”