Infection Prevention And Control Program Research Articles

Australia’s states and territories Infection Prevention and Control programs – a comparison study

Background: Infection prevention and control (IPC) remains a critical component of delivering quality and safe care. However, clinician understanding of and engagement with IPC remain inconsistent (1–3). In addition, IPC governance, structure and organisation impact on clinician engagement are not well described. Available publications are limited to healthcare-associated infection (HAI) surveillance and do not reflect the broader IPC program (4–6). As Australia establishes a national coordinating body similar to a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), a comparison of jurisdictional IPC provides essential contemporary information to inform the national body. Method: This study examined the characteristics of jurisdictional (states and territories) IPC programs in Australia and was conducted in two phases. Phase one examined outward facing websites likely to be accessed by clinicians, and phase two surveyed jurisdictional programs using a qualitative questionnaire. Results: Whilst each jurisdiction had accessible website content, this varied considerably in terms of governance, structure, content, ease of navigation, accessibility and visibility. There was a lack of national focus within jurisdictional programs and websites. Four of eight jurisdictions did not have a formal statewide IPC program at the time of the survey. Variance was reported in governance, structures, focus and program elements. Conclusion: Inconsistent IPC governance and structure demonstrates poorly aligned Australian IPC programs that may contribute to poor clinician understanding and engagement with IPC. Implementing a coordinated and consistent approach to governance, website design and layout would facilitate a consolidated approach to IPC nationally, which may facilitate clinician understanding and engagement. Shaping IPC nationally would also provide solid IPC foundations to support an Australian CDC.

Infection prevention and control programs in Armenian Psychoneurological Hospitals

Aim of the study: to characterize the integration and implementation of the main components of infection prevention and control (IPC), defined by the World Health Organization (WHO), in psychoneurological hospitals in Armenia. Materials and methods. The study was conducted over the period from 2019 to 2022 in all 8 psychoneurological hospitals in Armenia. The research tool was based on using the IPCAF (Infection Prevention and Control Assessment Framework) questionnaire translated into Armenian, consisting of 8 sections. In accordance with the WHO scoring methodology, each possible answer to the question was scored. The maximum total score for each core component could be 100 points, and the final score — 800. Descriptive epidemiology was used during the study. Results. The average final score for all IPCAF components for all neuropsychiatric hospitals in Armenia over the entire study period was increased by 1.46 times (from 345.0±10.7 points in 2019 to 502.5±32.5 in 2022; р 0.01) and in 2022 was characterized as an “intermediate level”. Analysis by individual IPC core components (CC) found that the highest average scores in 2022 were obtained for components CC2 (IPC guidelines) — 81.6 points, CC8 (Built environment, materials and equipment for IPC at the facility level) — 72.8 points, and CC5 (Multimodal strategies) — 70.0 points. The lowest average scores were obtained for the key components: CC4 (Health care-associated infection (HAI) surveillance) — 45.0 points, and for CC3 (IPC education and training) — 56.3 points and CC7 (Workload, staffing and bed occupancy) — 56.9 points. Conclusion. Our study demonstrated for the first time an opportunity for using the IPCAF questionnaire to evaluate IPC programs in neuropsychiatric hospitals and identify gaps in various areas of IPC. Information was received regarding the state of key IPC component implementation in psychoneurological hospitals in Armenia. Analysis by individual core components identified gaps that need to be addressed. It is recommended to implement continuous monitoring of compliance with various aspects of IPC in order to prevent weakening of control and deterioration of epidemiological situation.

Educational needs of community visiting nurses for infection prevention and control: Application of the Borich needs assessment and the Locus for Focus models.

This study aimed to assess the educational needs and analyze the priorities of infection prevention and control (IPC) for community-visiting nurses. This is a cross-sectional descriptive study. This study was conducted with 144 visiting nurses working in public health centers and long-term care facilities in South Korea. A total of 23 questions in five subcategories were used to measure the current knowledge and perceived importance of IPC in community-visiting nursing. Data were collected from June 23 to October 30, 2021, during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data were analyzed paired t-test, the Borich needs assessment, and the Locus for Focus models. Top-priority content was defined as content belonging to two models, the first 10 contents of Borich needs assessment and the contents located in the Quadrant I of the Locus for Focus models. "Reporting in case of infection-related accidents," "Mandatory vaccination for visiting nurses," "Standard precaution," "Airborne precaution," "Contact precautions," "Respiratory infection control," and "Post-visit management." This study suggests that it is necessary to provide visiting nurses with more opportunities for IPC education and to develop standardized IPC programs that consider educational priorities.

Key lessons from the establishment of a nurse-led infection prevention and control program for COVID-19 in an Australian hotel quarantine and isolation service

BackgroundA key aspect of Australia's response to the COVID-19 pandemic was to control transmission through legislated quarantine and isolation of overseas returning travellers and potentially infectious community members. In New South Wales, Special Health Accommodation (SHA) was rapidly established as a comprehensive health service for individuals that were at risk of having COVID-19, were confirmed to have COVID-19 or for those with complex health needs that were deemed inappropriate for management in Police managed Quarantine Hotels. SHA services were later expanded to care for community members who were COVID-19 positive and unable to effectively isolate, or contacts of individuals who were unable to quarantine effectively in their homes. SHA's unique nurse-led Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) program offers key lessons that may impact future programs. MethodsA reflection on the experience of leading an Infection Prevention and Control program in SHA was undertaken. This was supported by a review of SHA admission, workforce and transmission data and data obtained from a cross-sectional questionnaire aimed to better understand the experiences of a novel population of health workers (HW) in a comprehensive health-led quarantine and isolation service. ResultsSHA program data demonstrates how its IPC program implementation prevented transmission of COVID-19 to SHA staff and patients. Responses from the questionnaire suggested staff felt safe and well-prepared through the IPC education they received. They also gained transferrable knowledge and skills, which they intend to use in future healthcare roles. ConclusionThe SHA nurse-led IPC program offered successful quarantine and isolation for COVID-19 in non-purpose-built facilities. A review of IPC strategies and key lessons from the establishment of the SHA IPC program are of critical importance to planning and management of current and future pandemics.

Evaluation of infection prevention and control programmes according to the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control and the World Health Organization in Spain 2012–2022: indicators of core component 1

Key and core components of effective infection prevention and control programmes (IPCP) issued by the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) and the World Health Organization (WHO) have been described. WHO core component 1 relates to the structure, organization and management of IPCP. The objective of this study was to assess the status and the time trends of some indicators of core component 1 of IPCP in acute hospitals in Spain throughout the period 2012-2022. Hospital-level data from the Spanish point prevalence survey for years 2012-2022 were analyzed. Core component 1 indicators were calculated and tested for association to healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). In addition, trends were also examined. Overall, 67.0% and 57.2% of Spanish hospitals reported having an annual IPC plan and an annual IPC report that was approved by the hospital managing director, respectively. The global median number of full-time equivalent (FTE) IPC nurses per 250 beds for the period was 0.87 and the global median number of FTE IPC doctors was 0.70. The rates of blood cultures and stool tests for Clostridioides difficile were 39.9 and 6.1 per 1000 patient-days, respectively. No significant correlation was found between core component 1 indicators and HAI prevalence. Spain is currently at a basic level on the structure, organization and management of IPC programmes. Profound differences were found between hospitals depending on size and type.

Infection Prevention and Control in Correctional Settings.

Correctional facilities house millions of residents in communities throughout the United States. Such congregate settings are critical for national infection prevention and control (IPC) efforts. Carceral settings can be sites where infectious diseases are detected in patient populations who may not otherwise have access to health care services, and as highlighted by the COVID-19 pandemic, where outbreaks of infectious diseases may result in spread to residents, correctional staff, and the community at large. Correctional IPC, while sharing commonalities with IPC in other settings, is unique programmatically and operationally. In this article, we identify common challenges with correctional IPC program implementation and recommend action steps for advancing correctional IPC as a national public health priority.

Identifying a competency improvement strategy for infection prevention and control professionals: A rapid systematic review and cluster analysis

AbstractRemarkable progress has been made in infection prevention and control (IPC) in many countries, but some gaps emerged in the context of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic. Core capabilities such as standard clinical precautions and tracing the source of infection were the focus of IPC in medical institutions during the pandemic. Therefore, the core competences of IPC professionals during the pandemic, and how these contributed to successful prevention and control of the epidemic, should be studied. To investigate, using a systematic review and cluster analysis, fundamental improvements in the competences of infection control and prevention professionals that may be emphasized in light of the COVID‐19 pandemic. We searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, WanFang Data, and CBM databases for original articles exploring core competencies of IPC professionals during the COVID‐19 pandemic (from January 1, 2020 to February 7, 2023). Weiciyun software was used for data extraction and the Donohue formula was followed to distinguish high‐frequency technical terms. Cluster analysis was performed using the within‐group linkage method and squared Euclidean distance as the metric to determine the priority competencies for development. We identified 46 studies with 29 high‐frequency technical terms. The most common term was “infection prevention and control training” (184 times, 17.3%), followed by “hand hygiene” (172 times, 16.2%). “Infection prevention and control in clinical practice” was the most‐reported core competency (367 times, 34.5%), followed by “microbiology and surveillance” (292 times, 27.5%). Cluster analysis showed two key areas of competence: Category 1 (program management and leadership, patient safety and occupational health, education and microbiology and surveillance) and Category 2 (IPC in clinical practice). During the COVID‐19 pandemic, IPC program management and leadership, microbiology and surveillance, education, patient safety, and occupational health were the most important focus of development and should be given due consideration by IPC professionals.

Implementation of the WHO core components of an infection prevention and control programme in two sub-saharan African acute health-care facilities: a mixed methods study

BackgroundThe coronavirus pandemic again highlighted the need for robust health care facility infection prevention and control (IPC) programmes. WHO guidelines on the core components (CCs) of IPC programmes provides guidance for facilities, but their implementation can be difficult to achieve in resource-limited settings. We aimed to gather evidence on an initial WHO IPC implementation experience using a mixed methods approach.MethodsA five-day training on the WHO IPC CCs was conducted at two reference acute health care facilities in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Burkina Faso. This was accompanied by a three-part mixed-methods evaluation consisting of a: (1) baseline and follow-up survey of participants’ knowledge, attitudes and practices (KAP), (2) qualitative assessment of plenary discussion transcripts and (3) deployment of the WHO IPC assessment framework (IPCAF) tool. Results were analysed descriptively and with a qualitative inductive thematic approach.ResultsTwenty-two and twenty-four participants were trained at each facility, respectively. Baseline and follow-up KAP results suggested increases in knowledge related to the necessity of a dedicated IPC focal person and annual evaluations of IPC training although lack of recognition on the importance of including hospital leadership in IPC training and hand hygiene monitoring recommendations remained. Most participants reported rarely attending IPC meetings or participating in IPC action planning although attitudes shifted towards stronger agreement with the feeling of IPC responsibility and importance of an IPC team. A reocurring theme in plenary discussions was related to limited resources as a barrier to IPC implementation, namely lack of reliable water access. However, participants recognised the importance of IPC improvement efforts such as practical IPC training methods or the use of data to improve quality of care. The facilities’ IPCAF scores reflected a ‘basic/intermediate’ IPC implementation level.ConclusionsThe training and mixed methods evaluation revealed initial IPC implementation experiences that could be used to inform stepwise approaches to facility IPC improvement in resource-limited settings. Implementation strategies should consider both global standards such as the WHO IPC CCs and specific local contexts. The early involvement of all relevant stakeholders and parallel efforts to advocate for sufficient resources and health system infrastructure are critical.

Resources needed by critical access hospitals to address identified infection prevention and control program gaps.

The study examined resources needed by Infection Preventionists (IP) to address infection prevention and control (IPC) program gaps. A 49-question survey. Licensed Critical Access Hospitals (CAHs) in Federal Emergency Management Area (FEMA) Region VII. IP at licensed CAHs. The survey conducted between December 2020 and January 2021 consisted of questions focusing on four categories including IPC program infrastructure, competency-based training, audit and feedback, and identification of high-risk pathogens/serious communicable diseases (HRP/SCD). An IPC score was calculated for each facility by totaling "Yes" responses (which indicate best practices) to 49 main survey questions. Follow-up questions explored the resources needed by the CAHs to implement or further strengthen best practices and mitigate IPC practice gaps. Welch t-test was used to study differences in IPC practice scores between states. 50 of 259 (19.3%) CAHs participated in the survey with 37 (14.3%) answering all 49 questions. CAHs responding to all questions had a median IPC score of 35. There was no significant difference between IPC practice scores of CAHs in NE and IA. The top three IPC gaps were absence of drug diversion program (77%), lack of audits and feedback for insertion and maintenance of central venous catheters (76%), and missing laboratory risk assessments to identify tests that can be offered safely for patients under investigation for HRP/SCD (76%). Standardized audit tools, educational resources, and staff training materials were cited as much-needed resources. IPC practice gaps exist in CAHs. Various resources are needed for gap mitigation.

Analysing the implementation of infection prevention and control measures in health care facilities during the COVID-19 pandemic in the African Region

BackgroundThe declaration of SARS-CoV-2 as a public health emergency of international concern in January 2020 prompted the need to strengthen infection prevention and control (IPC) capacities within health care facilities (HCF). IPC guidelines, with standard and transmission-based precautions to be put in place to prevent the spread of SARS-CoV-2 at these HCFs were developed. Based on these IPC guidelines, a rapid assessment scorecard tool, with 14 components, to enhance assessment and improvement of IPC measures at HCFs was developed. This study assessed the level of implementation of the IPC measures in HCFs across the African Region during the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodAn observational study was conducted from April 2020 to November 2022 in 17 countries in the African Region to monitor the progress made in implementing IPC standard and transmission-based precautions in primary-, secondary- and tertiary-level HCFs. A total of 5168 primary, secondary and tertiary HCFs were assessed. The HCFs were assessed and scored each component of the tool. Statistical analyses were done using R (version 4.2.0).ResultsA total of 11 564 assessments were conducted in 5153 HCFs, giving an average of 2.2 assessments per HCF. The baseline median score for the facility assessments was 60.2%. Tertiary HCFs and those dedicated to COVID-19 patients had the highest IPC scores. Tertiary-level HCFs had a median score of 70%, secondary-level HCFs 62.3% and primary-level HCFs 56.8%. HCFs dedicated to COVID-19 patients had the highest scores, with a median of 68.2%, followed by the mixed facilities that attended to both COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 patients, with 64.84%. On the components, there was a strong correlation between high IPC assessment scores and the presence of IPC focal points in HCFs, the availability of IPC guidelines in HCFs and HCFs that had all their health workers trained in basic IPC.ConclusionIn conclusion, a functional IPC programme with a dedicated focal person is a prerequisite for implementing improved IPC measures at the HCF level. In the absence of an epidemic, the general IPC standards in HCFs are low, as evidenced by the low scores in the non-COVID-19 treatment centres.

Mapping of infection prevention and control education and training in some countries of the World Health Organization’s Eastern Mediterranean Region: current situation and future needs

BackgroundA strong understanding of infection prevention and control (IPC) procedures and comprehensive training among healthcare workers is essential for effective IPC programs. These elements play a crucial role in breaking the chain of nosocomial infections by preventing the transmission of resistant organisms to patients and staff members. This study mapped the components of IPC education and training across various member states of the World Health Organization (WHO) in the Eastern Mediterranean Region (EMR) at national, academic, and healthcare institutional levels.MethodsA self-administered structured online questionnaire based on the WHO “Core Component 3” of IPC programs at the national and acute healthcare facility levels (IPC education and training) was given to national IPC focal persons in each of the WHO’s EMR countries between February and March 2023.ResultsFrom 14 of the 22 countries,15 IPC persons participated in the survey. Most countries have scattered nonhomogeneous IPC education programs in human health undergraduate majors without considering it a standalone module. Academic institutions are rarely involved, and elaborate and predefined undergraduate IPC education programs provided by universities are present in 21.4% of the countries. In 71.4% of these countries, postgraduate training targeting IPC professionals is provided by national IPC teams, primarily based on national IPC guidelines developed with the aid of the WHO. Generally, healthcare worker training relies heavily on healthcare facilities in 92.9% of the countries, rather than on a national training program. In 42.9% of the countries, practicing IPC physicians are not necessarily specialists of infectious disease or medical microbiologists and IPC nurses are not required to specialize in IPC. However, nonspecialized IPC professionals are expected to undergo training upon employment and before beginning practice. Nongovernmental organizations such as the WHO play a significant role in IPC education and in supporting national IPC authorities in establishing national IPC guidelines, as it is the case in 78.6% of these countries.ConclusionClear disparities exist in IPC education and training across different countries in the WHO’s EMR. Establishing a regional scientific network specializing in IPC would help bridge the existing gaps and standardize this education within individual countries and across countries in the region. This region needs to establish IPC certification standards and standardized education curricula.

Characterizing infection prevention programs and urinary tract infection prevention practices in nursing homes: A mixed-methods study.

US policies require robust nursing home (NH) infection prevention and control (IPC) programs to ensure safe care. We assessed IPC resources and practices related to catheter and non-catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI and UTI) prevention among NHs. We conducted a mixed-methods study from April 2018 through November 2019. Quantitative surveys assessed NH IPC program resources, practices, and communication during resident transfer. Semistructured qualitative interviews focused on IPC programs, CAUTI and UTI prevention practices, and resident transfer processes. Using a matrix as an analytic tool, findings from the quantitative survey data were combined with the qualitative data in the form of a joint display. Representatives from 51 NHs completed surveys; interviews were conducted with 13 participants from 7 NHs. Infection preventionists (IPs) had limited experience and/or additional roles, and in 36.7% of NHs, IPs had no specific IPC training. IP turnover was often mentioned during interviews. Most facilities were aware of their CAUTI and UTI rates and reported using prevention practices, such as hydration (85.7%) or nurse-initiated catheter discontinuation (65.3%). Qualitative interviewees confirmed use of these practices and expressed additional concerns about overuse of urine testing and antibiotics. Although transfer sheets were used by 84% to communicate about infections, the information received was described as suboptimal. NHs identified IP challenges related to turnover, limited education, and serving multiple roles. However, most NHs reported awareness of their CAUTI and UTI rates as well as their use of prevention practices. Importantly, we identified opportunities to enhance communication between NHs and hospitals to improve resident care and safety.

Incidence of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) among healthcare workers during the first and second wave in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: a descriptive study

BackgroundHealthcare workers (HCWs) are at the frontline of response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Protecting HCWs is of paramount importance to the World Health Organization (WHO). Outbreak investigation which is based on a critical assessment of core components of infection prevention and control (IPC) programs allows for the identification of different sources of exposure to the COVID-19 virus and for informing additional IPC recommendations. To date, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) is categorized as a high-risk country due to weaknesses in the health system, low capacity for diagnosis, socioeconomic characteristics of the population, and insufficient vaccination coverage.AimTo investigate the burden of COVID-19 among HCWs and identification of IPC gaps to reduce HCWs-associated infection at different levels (facilities, communities, and points of entry) following the WHO strategy for IPC program implementation during the first to the third wave of the pandemic.MethodsA retrospective cohort study was conducted using the DRC National Department of Health (NDOH) database and WHO questionnaire suspected and confirmed COVID-19 cases among HCWs from 10/03/2020 to 22/06/2021. The investigation was conducted by a trained IPC response team to identify the sources of the exposures. The questionnaire included demographics, profession, types of interaction between HCWs and patients, and community-based questions regarding family members and other behaviors. These variables were assessed using a multimodal strategy framework. Knowledge and adherence to IPC gaps using WHO guidelines were performed for each COVID-19-positive or suspected HCW. WHO rapid Scorecard dashboard was conducted for evaluating healthcare facilities (HCFs) performance during the COVID-19 pandemic.ResultsCumulative incidence of positive HCWs was 809 /35,898(2.2%) from the first to the third wave of COVID-19 among 6 provinces of DRC. The distribution of the HCWs infected by COVID-19 was predominated by nurses (42%), doctors (27%), biologists (8%), environmental health practitioners (5%), interns (3%), and other categories (15%). Other categories included nutritionists, physiotherapists, midwives, pharmacists, and paramedics. The investigation revealed that about 32% of HCWs were infected from household contacts, 11% were infected by HCFs, 35% were infected in the community and 22% were infected from unknown exposures. The mean score of IPC performance for all evaluated HCFs was 27/42(64%). This shows that IPC performance was moderate. Lower or minimal performance was noted in the implementation of the IPC program at the national and facility level, triage and screening, isolation handwashing and multimodal strategies of hand hygiene, PPE availability, and rationale, waste segregation, waste disposal, sterilization, and training of HCWs.ConclusionThis study revealed that the prevalence of HCWs who tested positive for the COVID-19 virus was high among frontline healthcare workers from 6 provinces of DRC. A high prevalence of nosocomial infection was correlated with insufficient IPC adherence in the context of COVID-19. Strategies to strengthen IPC capacity building and provide HCWs with sufficient PPE stocks and budgets may improve IPC performance in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. This will further allow for adherence to WHO recommendations for successful program implementation to minimize COVID-19 transmission in HCFs, communities, and public gatherings. And this may be transferable to other infectious diseases.

The role of online marketing to engage healthcare workers with infection prevention and control information and resources: A pilot study.

The successful adoption and application of infection prevention and control (IPC) principles in all healthcare settings is dependent on the degree to which healthcare workers (HCWs) are aware of the requirements, have access to program resources and information, and engage with the IPC program. This study investigates the impact of redesigning the Infection Control Department (ICD) intranet site based on user feedback followed by a targeted marketing campaign to improve website usability, awareness, and access. In this systematic study, we used a survey plus two focus group interviews to elicit user requirements for the content and look of the ICD intranet page and identify the best communication platforms to use for the marketing campaign to launch the redesigned intranet page. The information was used to redesign the intranet page and develop the marketing campaign. The survey was repeated post-intervention and these results, along with a comparison of website analytics monitoring traffic, were used to determine the success of the intervention. The ICD intranet page redesign increased the information and resources. Post-intervention survey results demonstrated a significant improvement in user satisfaction including ease of navigation and access to IPC information and resources. The marketing campaign resulted in a significant increase in website traffic to the ICD intranet page, demonstrating enhanced engagement with HCWs. This study demonstrated that website redesign based on user feedback, combined with a marketing campaign, can increase the traffic to the website and improve the user experience when accessing and navigating the site making the information and resources more accessible to HCWs.

Improvement in Infection Prevention and Control Performance Following Operational Research in Sierra Leone: A Before (2021) and After (2023) Study.

Infection prevention and control (IPC) is crucial to limit health care-associated infections and antimicrobial resistance. An operational research study conducted in Sierra Leone in 2021 reported sub-optimal IPC performance and provided actionable recommendations for improvement. This was a before-and-after study involving the national IPC unit and all twelve district-level secondary public hospitals. IPC performance in 2021 (before) and in 2023 (after) was assessed using standardized World Health Organization checklists. IPC performance was graded as: inadequate (0-25%), basic (25.1-50%), intermediate (50.1-75%), and advanced (75.1-100%). The overall IPC performance in the national IPC unit moved from intermediate (58%) to advanced (78%), with improvements in all six core components. Four out of six components achieved advanced levels when compared to the 2021 levels. The median score for hospitals moved from basic (50%) to intermediate (59%), with improvements in six of eight components. Three of four gaps identified in 2021 at the national IPC unit and four of seven at hospitals had been addressed by 2023. The study highlights the role of operational research in informing actions that improved IPC performance. There is a need to embed operational research as part of the routine monitoring of IPC programs.

Rats! Infection prevention's journey during a hospital kitchen infestation

Infection Prevention and Control programs have the inherent authority to institute extreme measures when an infection is a threat to wellness. This report describes an Infection Prevention and Control program's collaborative approach when a hospital kitchen was closed due to rodents, how infection risks were mitigated, and practice revisions were made to avoid future infestations. Learnings from this report can be adopted acrosshealth care settings to encourage reporting vectors and promote transparency.

Healthcare worker perceptions about infection prevention and control processes and practices in Latin America

Background: The burden of hospital-associated infections (HAIs) and antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in Latin America is high. Improving engagement by healthcare workers (HCWs) in infection prevention and control (IPC) may lead to better patient outcomes; however, little is known about HCW perceptions of IPC in the region. We sought to understand HCW perceptions of IPC processes and practices. Methods: During August–September 2022, HCWs from 30 hospitals with IPC programs in 4 Latin American countries (Panama, Guatemala, Ecuador, and Argentina) were invited to participate in an electronic, voluntary, anonymous survey about their perceptions of IPC at their hospitals. Physicians, nurses, and environmental care (EVC) personnel were prioritized for recruitment. All respondents were asked 18 questions; IPC team members were asked 5 additional questions about specific activities implemented by IPC programs, how data are used, and how IPC could be improved. Answers with 5-point Likert scale responses were categorized into 2 groups (eg, strongly agree or agree vs neutral, disagree, or strongly disagree) for analysis. Results: Of 1,252 HCWs who completed the survey, 181 (14%) were IPC team members, 1,095 (87%) had direct patient contact, and 1,156 (92%) worked >20 hours per week. Figure 1 shows participant characteristics. Most participants (56%) rated their IPC program as very good, 38% rated it as good, and 6% rated it as bad. Physicians were less likely to give a favorable rating. Compliance with prevention bundles and hand hygiene (HH) by colleagues was rated as poor by 28% and 22% of HCWs, respectively; however, only 11% and 5% indicated that their own compliance was poor, respectively. Also, 25% of participants reported not receiving or only occasionally receiving HH compliance data. Similarly, 41% of participants reported not receiving HAI data on a regular basis, and 19% of IPC nurses reported not receiving data despite being responsible for conducting surveillance. Furthermore, 41% of respondents indicated not receiving or only occasionally receiving IPC training or education relevant to their role. When asked about the safety climate, 16% of participants reported not feeling appreciated. In addition, 22% of IPC nurses and 37% of individuals in the “other” category (eg, health technicians and therapists) were more likely to report this. When IPC team members were asked how frequently specific activities were conducted (Fig. 2), several opportunities for improvement were identified, including improving HCW access to HH data and development of strategic plans. Conclusions: Improving HCW access to training on IPC and to data on HAI burden and compliance with HH and prevention bundles should be emphasized in Latin American hospitals.Disclosures: None

An infection prevention and control program established in the wake of the Ebola epidemic: Where are we, and how well are we doing?

Background: Infection prevention and control (IPC) is a clinical and public health discipline based on a scientific approach and practical preventive and control measures. During the 2014–2016 West African Ebola outbreak, the high number of healthcare worker infections was attributed to inadequate IPC in Sierra Leone. This stimulated the establishment of national and subnational IPC programs. Since then, IPC has remained a priority to improve the health systems and strategic interventions during public health emergencies. Therefore, we conducted a detailed review to assess the status of the IPC programs. Methods: A descriptive analysis of the status of IPC programs in Sierra Leone was done using data from IPC assessments conducted in 2022 by the national IPC team, reviews of reports on program implementation, and experts’ objective opinions. Results:Performance. The national IPC assessment revealed strengths in 4 of 6 WHO IPC core components, with an overall score of 61% positioned at the ‘intermediate’ level of implementation. The best-performing component was ‘IPC guidelines’ (92%) with evidenced-based guidelines being developed and implemented over the years. Secondly, ‘Education and training’ (71%) made progress in basic and advanced IPC training, including the development of a preservice training curriculum. Also, ‘monitoring and audit and feedback’ (69%) and ‘IPC program’ (61%) met the basic requirements of an established Monitoring & Evaluation (M&E) system. Similar progress was made at the healthcare facility level, but with major gaps in ‘workload, staffing, bed-occupancy’ and ‘safe or built environment.’ Sustainability efforts. Evidence-based data on IPC have always been scarce due to a limited capacity to conduct IPC research. The Structured Operational Research and Training Initiative (SORT-IT) on antimicrobial resistance has helped promote evidence-informed decisions and build OR capacity that is relevant to improving program performance. In 2019, Sierra Leone instituted in-country production of alcohol-based handrub and liquid soap as a strategic intervention for providing hand hygiene products for use in healthcare facilities. This intervention was essential during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic. Although most aspects of IPC implementation are government led with strong leadership support, stable funding and sustainability planning are yet to be achieved and will be crucial for long-term success. Conclusions: Most aspects of the IPC core components have been well implemented at the national level since the establishment of the IPC program. However, the program should continue improving the scope and quality of implementation and focus on the development of long-term plans to sustain existing gains and further improve on gap areas at the national level and especially the healthcare-facility level.Disclosures: None

Infection prevention and control perspective and practices among healthcare workers in Bangladesh: A multicenter cross section

Background: Infection prevention and control (IPC) is a critical feature of preventing the spread of healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) in hospitals. IPC practices are particularly important in resource-constrained and crowded hospital settings. The successful implementation of infection prevention measures depends on healthcare worker (HCW) knowledge of, attitude toward, and practice (KAP) of IPC. In this project, we assessed the KAP of HCWs and identified factors associated with IPC compliance at tertiary-care hospitals in Bangladesh. Methods: From September 2020 to January 2021, we conducted this hospital-based cross-sectional assessment at 11 tertiary-care hospitals. A semistructured questionnaire was used to conduct face-to-face interviews with physicians, nurses, and cleaning staff who were directly involved in patient care. Based on >75% of the total score, each KAP component was divided into adequate knowledge, favorable attitude, and safe practice. We performed descriptive analysis and multivariate logistic regression to determine the KAP score and associated factors influencing IPC compliance in hospital settings. Results: In total, 1,728 HCWs were interviewed; 76.8% of the participants had adequate knowledge on IPC and 54.6% reported safe practices. However, only 16.2% of HCWs had a favorable attitude toward IPC. Among the 3 HCW groups, nurses had the highest KAP scores (76.07±12.7) followed by physicians (69.8±16.2), and cleaning staff (34.4±27.3). Only 29.2% of HCWs reported having received IPC training, and they cited heavy workload as a barrier to IPC guideline adherence. HCWs having adequate knowledge showed 9 times higher odds of safe IPC practice (AOR, 9.36; 95% CI, 5.47–16.04). HCWs who had a favorable attitude toward IPC were 16 times as likely to perform safe practice toward IPC activities (AOR, 15.5; 95% CI, 10.27–23.42). Conclusions: Knowledge of safe practices and having a favorable attitude toward IPC are key components of a successful IPC program. Significant improvements are required among all levels of HCWs in Bangladesh tertiary-care hospitals, especially cleaning staff. Educational interventions to train on IPC guidelines, plus monitoring, could improve HCW safe practices.Disclosures: None

A continent-wide effort and solidarity at curbing COVID-19 pandemic: the Africa task force for novel coronavirus (AFTCOR) infection prevention and control technical working group’s experience

A continent-wide Africa Task Force for Coronavirus with its six technical working groups was formed to prepare adequately and respond to the novel Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak in Africa. This research in practice article aimed to describe how the infection prevention and control (IPC) technical working group (TWG) supported Africa Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (Africa CDC) in preparedness and response to COVID-19 on the continent. To effectively address the multifaceted IPC TWG mandate of organizing training and implementing rigorous IPC measures at healthcare service delivery points, the working group was sub-divided into four sub-groups—Guidelines, Training, Research, and Logistics. The action framework was used to describe the experiences of each subgroup. The guidelines subgroup developed 14 guidance documents and two advisories; all of which were published in English. In addition, five of these documents were translated and published in Arabic, while three others were translated and published in French and Portuguese. Challenges faced in the guidelines subgroup included the primary development of the Africa CDC website in English, and the need to revise previously issued guidelines. The training subgroup engaged the Infection Control Africa Network as technical experts to carry out in-person training of IPC focal persons and port health personnel across the African continent. Challenges faced included the difficulty in conducting face-to-face IPC training and onsite technical support due to the lockdown. The research subgroup developed an interactive COVID-19 Research Tracker on the Africa CDC website and conducted a context-based operation and implementation research. The lack of understanding of Africa CDC’s capacity to lead her own research was the major challenge faced by the research subgroup. The logistics subgroup assisted African Union (AU) member states to identify their IPC supply needs through capacity building for IPC quantification. A notable challenge faced by the logistics subgroup was the initial lack of experts on IPC logistics and quantifications, which was later addressed by the recruitment of professionals. In conclusion, IPC cannot be built overnight nor can it be promoted abruptly during outbreaks of diseases. Thus, the Africa CDC should build strong national IPC programmes and support such programmes with trained and competent professionals.