How to improve hospital admission screening for patients at risk of multidrug-resistant organism carriage: a before-and-after interventional study and cost-effectiveness analysis

BMJ Open Quality

article

Dominique Joubert¹  Stephane Cullati²  Pascal Briot²  Lorenzo Righi²  Damien Grauser⁴  Aimad Ourahmoune²  Pierre Chopard² 

[1] Nursing Department, Quality of care , University Hospitals of Geneva;Quality of Care Service , University Hospitals of Geneva;Population Health Laboratory ,(#PopHealthLab) , University of Fribourg;IT System Department , University Hospitals of Geneva;Department of Readaptation and Geriatrics , University Hospitals of Geneva

关键词: Quality measurement;    Education;    Infection control;    Cost-effectiveness;    Quality improvement;   

DOI  :  10.1136/bmjoq-2021-001699

学科分类：药学

来源: BMJ Publishing Group

【 摘 要 】

Background Infection prevention and control (IPC) is a prioritised task for healthcare workers in emergency department (ED). Here, we examined compliance with admission screening (AS) and additional precautions (AP) measures for patients at risk of infection with multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) by using a two-stage, multifaceted educational intervention, also comparing the cost of a developed automated indicator for AS and AP compliance and clinical audits to sustain observed findings.Methods In the first stage, staff in the ED of the University Hospitals of Geneva, Switzerland, were briefed on IPC measures (AS and AP). A cross-sectional survey was then conducted to assess barriers to IPC measures. In the second stage, healthcare workers underwent training sessions, and an electronic patient record ‘order-set’ including AS and AP compliance indicators was designed. We compared the cost–benefit of the audits and the automated indicators for AS and AP compliance.Results Compliance significantly improved after training, from 36.2% (95% CI 23.6% to 48.8%) to 78.8% (95% CI 67.1% to 90.3%) for AS (n=100, p=0.0050) and from 50.2% (95% CI 45.3% to 55.1%) to 68.5% (95% CI 60.1% to 76.9%) for AP (n=125, p=0.0092). Healthcare workers recognised MDRO screening as an ED task (70.2%), with greater acknowledgment of risk factors at AS considered an ED duty. The monthly cost was higher for clinical audits than the automated indicator, with a reported yearly cost of US$120 203. The initial cost of developing the automated indicator was US$18 290 and its return on investment US$3.44 per US$1 invested.Conclusion Training ED staff increased compliance with IPC measures when accompanied by team discussions for optimal effectiveness. An automated indicator of compliance is cheaper and closer to real-time than a clinical audit.

【 授权许可】

CC BY-NC|CC BY|CC BY-NC-ND