Infection Prevention And Control Team Research Articles

Evaluating the impact of genomic epidemiology of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) on hospital infection prevention and control decisions.

Genomic epidemiology enhances the ability to detect and refute methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) outbreaks in healthcare settings, but its routine introduction requires further evidence of benefits for patients and resource utilization. We performed a 12 month prospective study at Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust in the UK to capture its impact on hospital infection prevention and control (IPC) decisions. MRSA-positive samples were identified via the hospital microbiology laboratory between November 2018 and November 2019. We included samples from in-patients, clinic out-patients, people reviewed in the Emergency Department and healthcare workers screened by Occupational Health. We sequenced the first MRSA isolate from 823 consecutive individuals, defined their pairwise genetic relatedness, and sought epidemiological links in the hospital and community. Genomic analysis of 823 MRSA isolates identified 72 genetic clusters of two or more isolates containing 339/823 (41 %) of the cases. Epidemiological links were identified between two or more cases for 190 (23 %) individuals in 34/72 clusters. Weekly genomic epidemiology updates were shared with the IPC team, culminating in 49 face-to-face meetings and 21 written communications. Seventeen clusters were identified that were consistent with hospital MRSA transmission, discussion of which led to additional IPC actions in 14 of these. Two outbreaks were also identified where transmission had occurred in the community prior to hospital presentation; these were escalated to relevant IPC teams. We identified 38 instances where two or more in-patients shared a ward location on overlapping dates but carried unrelated MRSA isolates (pseudo-outbreaks); research data led to de-escalation of investigations in six of these. Our findings provide further support for the routine use of genomic epidemiology to enhance and target IPC resources.

A One Health approach to fight antimicrobial resistance in Uganda: Implementation experience, results, and lessons learned

Uganda has been implementing the Global Health Security Agenda (GHSA) since 2015 to build its capacity according to World Health Organization (WHO) Benchmarks on International Health Regulations Capacities. The country remains prone to outbreaks, with more than 20 disease outbreaks reported in the past five years, including Ebola virus disease, Crimean-Congo haemorrhagic fever, Marburg haemorrhagic fever, measles, yellow fever, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), and cholera. Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is an ongoing challenge. Uganda scored capacity level 3 on infection prevention and control (IPC) and antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) in the 2017 Joint External Evaluation (JEE) assessment. Identified gaps were being addressed after a self-assessment in 2021. This paper describes the technical assistance approaches provided to Uganda by the Medicines, Technologies, and Pharmaceutical Services Program, funded by the United States (U.S.) Agency for International Development, and implemented by Management Sciences for Health. The program, through a One Health approach, supported systematic capacity strengthening based on the JEE’s capacity advancement framework for global health security, specifically relating to AMR. The program’s interventions impacted 32 WHO benchmark actions (7 for AMR multisectoral coordination, 16 for IPC, and 9 for AMS), contributing to Uganda’s strengthened GHSA capacity. Leveraging success built on the AMR platform, the program trained 745 health workers in IPC for the Ebola virus and provided support for simulation exercises by eight district IPC teams. The program also worked with the Ministry of Health to coordinate IPC for the COVID-19 response in five health regions, covering 45 districts and reaching 5,452 health workers at 858 health facilities.

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.

The utility of whole-genome sequencing to inform epidemiologic investigations of SARS-CoV-2 clusters in acute-care hospitals.

To evaluate the utility of selective reactive whole-genome sequencing (WGS) in aiding healthcare-associated cluster investigations. Mixed-methods quality-improvement study. Thes study was conducted across 8 acute-care facilities in an integrated health system. We analyzed healthcare-associated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) clusters between May 2020 and July 2022 for which facility infection prevention and control (IPC) teams selectively requested reactive WGS to aid the epidemiologic investigation. WGS was performed with real-time results provided to IPC teams, including genetic relatedness of sequenced isolates. We conducted structured interviews with IPC teams on the informativeness of WGS for transmission investigation and prevention. In total, 8 IPC teams requested WGS to aid the investigation of 17 COVID-19 clusters comprising 226 cases and 116 (51%) sequenced isolates. Of these, 16 (94%) clusters had at least 1 WGS-defined transmission event. IPC teams hypothesized transmission pathways in 14 (82%) of 17 clusters and used data visualizations to characterize these pathways in 11 clusters (65%). The teams reported that in 15 clusters (88%), WGS identified a transmission pathway; the WGS-defined pathway was not one that was predicted by epidemiologic investigation in 7 clusters (41%). WGS changed the understanding of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission in 8 clusters (47%) and altered infection prevention interventions in 8 clusters (47%). Selectively utilizing reactive WGS helped identify cryptic SARS-CoV-2 transmission pathways and frequently changed the understanding and response to SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks. Until WGS is widely adopted, a selective reactive WGS approach may be highly impactful in response to healthcare-associated cluster investigations.

Infection prevention and control in CT Part 1: An Australian study of roles, responsibilities and practices

IntroductionThe computed tomography (CT) suite presents Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) risks for staff and patients. This is the first of a two-part series on IPC in the CT setting and reports on Australian baseline data related to intravenous contrast media administration and the use of power injectors in the CT suite, including knowledge sources related to the delivery of contrast media. The second part provides insights into CT staff's perceptions of high-risk scenarios for non-adherence to standard or transmission-based precautions. MethodsThe study employed an online survey design, directed at radiographers and radiology nurses working in Australia. The survey included questions relating to CT workplace staffing and equipment, contrast media use and occupational roles, and knowledge sources used for infection control and contrast injectors. ResultsOverall, 160 study participants completed the survey (radiographers: n = 138, 86.3%; nurses: n = 22, 13.7%). Differences were identified between public and private practice. Public hospitals completed more contrast-enhanced scans, and with dual injecting systems, operated and cleaned by radiographers and nurses. Private clinics generally used single-system, power injectors. Radiographers and nurses relied heavily on their colleagues and product guidelines for IPC information. IPC teams were uncommon in private clinics, very common in public departments and 50% of respondents had undertaken IPC training in the last 12 months. ConclusionInsights into use and duties of professionals delivering intravenous contrast media administration using power injectors in the CT suite will help to inform decision-making processes on IPC education strategies and map risk. Implication for practiceFuture research should focus on how radiology workers in CT perceive IPC risk and/or might vary from best practice, which has direct clinical implications for safety if contamination, or incorrect information is routinely applied.

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.

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

Extending infection prevention and control nursing (IPCN) provision to weekends at one National Health Service hospital in the United Kingdom: A feasibility and acceptability study.

Hospital Infection Prevention and Control Teams (IPCTs) provide clinical cover during weekdays with on call support at weekends. We report the results of a 6-month pilot of extending infection prevention and control nursing (IPCN) clinical cover to weekends at one National Health Service trust in the United Kingdom. We examined daily episodes of infection prevention and control (IPC) clinical advice given before and during the pilot of extended IPCN to weekends. Stakeholders rated the value, impact, and their awareness of the new extended IPCN cover. Episodes of clinical advice given were more evenly distributed across the weeks during the pilot. Advantages for infection management, patient flow, and clinical workload were seen. IPCN clinical cover at weekends is feasible and valued by stakeholders.

Emotional intelligence: Its place in infection prevention and control.

The Infection Prevention Societies Competency Framework is a detailed tool that recognises the multi factorial work of Infection Prevention and Control Teams. This work often takes place in complex, chaotic and busy environments where non-compliance with policies, procedures and guidelines is endemic. As reductions in Healthcare Associated Infection became a health service priority the tone of Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) became increasingly uncompromising and punitive. This can create conflict between IPC professionals and clinicians who may take a different view as to the reasons for sub optimum practice. If unresolved, this can create a tension that has a negative impact on working relationships and ultimately patient outcomes. Emotional Intelligence, that ability to recognise, understand and manage our own emotions and recognise, understand and influence the emotions of others, is not something, hitherto, that has been headlined as an attribute for individuals working in IPC. Individuals with higher level of Emotional Intelligence show a greater capacity for learning, deal with pressure more effectively, communicate in interesting and assertive ways and recognise the strengths and weaknesses of others. Overall, the trend is that they are more productive and satisfied in the workplace. Emotional Intelligence should be a much sought after trait in IPC as this will better equip a post holder to deliver challenging IPC programmes. When appointing to an IPC team, the candidates Emotional Intelligence should be considered and then developed through a process of education and reflection.

The role of pandemic planning in the management of COVID-19 in England from an infection prevention and control perspective: results of a national survey

ObjectivesThis national survey aimed to explore how existing pandemic preparedness plans (PPP) accounted for the demands placed on infection prevention and control (IPC) services in acute and community settings in England during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Study designThis was a cross-sectional survey of IPC leaders working within National Health Service Trusts or clinical commissioning groups/integrated care systems in England. MethodsThe survey questions related to organisational COVID-19 preparedness pre-pandemic and the response provided during the first wave of the pandemic (January to July 2020). The survey ran from September to November 2021, and participation was voluntary. ResultsIn total, 50 organisations responded. Seventy-one percent (n = 34/48) reported having a current PPP in December 2019, with 81% (n = 21/26) indicating their plan was updated within the previous 3 years. Around half of IPC teams were involved in previous testing of these plans via internal and multi-agency tabletop exercises. Successful aspects of pandemic planning were identified as command structures, clear channels of communication, COVID-19 testing, and patient pathways. Key deficiencies were lack of personal protective equipment, difficulties with fit testing, keeping up to date with guidance, and insufficient staffing. ConclusionsPandemic plans need to consider the capability and capacity of IPC services to ensure they can contribute their critical knowledge and expertise to the pandemic response. This survey provides a detailed evaluation of how IPC services were impacted during the first wave of the pandemic and identifies key areas, which need to be included in future PPP to better manage the impact on IPC services.

SG-APSIC1162: Challenges in building and running a 4,000-bed COVID-19 intensive care unit in an exhibition center

Objectives: To describe the design process for a hospital in an exhibition center. We discuss challenges during the building process and areas in which risk assessments had to be made and practices modified to mitigate suboptimal conditions. Methods: UK National Health Service designers and military planners worked in conjunction with the infection prevention and control team (IPCT) to work with the existing infrastructure. The clinical area was deemed to be an aerosol-generating procedure (AGP) zone because it was entirely an intensive care unit. The challenges included no oxygen line, a lack of hot water, minimal access to cold water, almost no drainage, and a lack of physical space in which to carry out many necessary procedures. These challenges were overcome either by design or by changes to usual practices through mitigation measures. The IPCT had key roles in ensuring staff and patient safety and personal protective equipment (PPE) inventory management as well as donning and doffing procedures. Results: The Nightingale Hospital became a fully functioning ICU within 10 days of the build commencing, and the first patients were admitted within a few days. The hospital was used only sparingly because the national pandemic lockdown was in effect. In total, 72 patients were admitted, with a survival rate of 63%, comparable to established ICUs. Transmission rates of COVID-19 in staff were very low among those working clinically. The unit closed in June 2020 but reopened in January 2021 for rehabilitation with a smaller number of beds but better facilities as a result of our experience in the first iteration. Conclusions: A temporary hospital was built in an exhibition center to successfully manage a number of patients. Even in a temporary hospital facility that was limited in services, successful outcomes were achieved.

Tailoring implementation interventions of different order in infection prevention and control: A cascadic logic model (IPC-CASCADE).

Implementation interventions in infection prevention and control (IPC) differ by recipients. The two target groups are healthcare workers directly involved in patient care ("frontline") and IPC professionals as proxy agents, that is, implementation support practitioners. While both types of implementation interventions aim to promote compliance with clinical interventions to prevent healthcare-associated infections (HAI), their tailoring may be vastly different, for example, due to different behavioural outcomes. Additionally, IPC teams, as recipients of empowering tailored interventions, are under-researched. To overcome this gap and improve conceptual clarity, we proposed a cascadic logic model for tailored IPC interventions (IPC-CASCADE). In the model, we distinguished between interventions by IPC professionals targeting clinicians and those targeting IPC professionals (first- and second-order implementation interventions, respectively). Tailoring implies selecting behaviour change techniques matched to prospectively-assessed determinants of either clinician compliance (in first-order interventions) or interventions by IPC professionals for frontline workers (in second-order interventions). This interventional cascade is embedded in the prevailing healthcare system. IPC-CASCADE is horizontally structured over time and vertically structured by hierarchy or leadership roles. IPC-CASCADE aims to highlight the potential of increasing the impact of tailored interventions by IPC professionals for clinicians (to improve their compliance) via tailored interventions for IPC professionals (to improve their work as proxy agents). It underlines the links that IPC professionals define between macro contexts (healthcare and hospitals) and frontline workers in HAI prevention. It is specific, i.e., "tailored" to IPC, and expected to assist implementation science to better conceptualise tailoring.

Adherence to Infection Prevention and Control Measures Among Health-Care Workers Serving in COVID-19 Treatment Centers in Punjab, Pakistan.

Infection prevention and control (IPC) measures are easily adoptable activities to prevent the spread of infection to patients as well as among health-care workers (HCWs). This cross-sectional study evaluated the adherence to IPC measures among HCWs working at coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatment centers in Punjab, Pakistan. HCWs were recruited by means of convenient sampling through Google Form® using the World Health Organization risk assessment tool. All data were analyzed using SPSS 20. A total of 414 HCWs completed the survey (response rate = 67.8%), and majority of them were males (56.3%). Most of the HCWs were nurses (39.6%) followed by medical doctors (27.3%). Approximately 53% reported insufficiency of personal protective equipment (PPE), 58.2% did not receive IPC training and 40.8% did not have functional IPC team at their health facilities. The majority of HCWs (90%) used disposable gloves and N95 facemasks while interacting with COVID-19 patients. Nearly 45% used protective face shields and gowns before providing care to their patients. Hand hygiene practices while touching, and performing any aseptic procedure was adopted by 70.5% and 74.1% of HCWs, respectively. In conclusion, the adherence to IPC measures among Pakistani HCWs working in COVID-19 treatment centers is good despite the limited availability of PPEs. Their practices can be optimized by establishing institutional IPC teams, periodic provision of IPC training, and necessary PPE.

The challenges of faulty autoclaves: An IPAC lapse investigation

An Infection Prevention and Control (IPAC) lapse at a physician’s office resulted in 54 non-compliance issues identified. Eight high-risk items were all associated with reprocessing. Examination of the autoclave revealed numerous structural concerns as it was a discontinued model of autoclave that originated from a retired physician. Three biological indicators were used to verify effectiveness of the autoclave but all of which failed. In consultation with Public Health Ontario’s IPAC team, contract tracing was needed as there was a risk to patients. Without adequate sterilization logs, the timeframe of patient records needed was the date after the autoclave was serviced by a technician until the date of the initial investigation. Lessons learned from this investigation include the need to reach out to suppliers to confirm compatibility of biological indicators with older model autoclaves and the importance of reviewing technician reports to understand when the device was last effective. With an increase in physician’s retiring during the COVID-19 pandemic, this case study highlights how discontinued autoclaves may be re-circulated into practice. This could result in similar issues faced by other public health inspectors.

Status of infection prevention and control capacity in Korean hospitals: implications for disaster response and pandemic preparedness

ObjectivesThis study aims to explore the association of hospital infection prevention and control (IPC) structure (i.e. a dedicated IPC team and/or IPC committee) and IPC capacity in Korean hospitals, as well as its implications in the response and preparedness to COVID-19. Study designThis was a cross-sectional study using data collected through a nationwide survey. MethodsParticipating hospitals completed an online questionnaire. Participation was voluntary. The survey questionnaire was developed by the government in consultation with IPC experts. The questionnaire was distributed to 2108 hospitals, including both acute and long-term care hospitals. The independent variables were the presence of an IPC team and/or IPC committee. The dependent variables were IPC activities and capacity measures, which were based on the World Health Organisation (WHO) recommendations on the core components in IPC. ResultsA total of 1442 hospitals completed the survey. Hospitals with IPC structures conducted significantly more IPC activities in all outcome measures compared with hospitals without IPC structures, with the exceptions of monitoring hand hygiene and screening for infectious diseases that showed non-significant differences. Hospitals with IPC structures showed a significant difference in performance in IPC risk assessment, operating outbreak response teams and appraisal of hospital IPC policies compared with hospitals without IPC structures. ConclusionsThe presence of a dedicated IPC team and IPC committee was associated with increased IPC activities and IPC capacity. Hospitals with IPC teams and IPC committees showed strong implementation of planning, appraisal, resource management and outbreak response, indicating that strengthening IPC structures within hospitals is the key to more effective IPC and disaster response.

Management of infection prevention and control in the development of new hospital buildings – effective stakeholder engagement during design and construction

Specific elements of building services such as heating, ventilation or water supply systems can play a key role in infection prevention and control (IPC) within hospital buildings and links between the design of such systems and increased rates of healthcare associated infections (HAI) have been identified. These links are complex and multifactorial and several issues have a bearing on this relationship during the construction of a hospital buildings. One such issue is the nature and efficacy of the engagement of IPC specialists employed by the client end user during the development process. Good management of IPC issues not only supports effective IPC team engagement but depends upon it to achieve key aims. Research suggests, however, that the quality of IPC team engagement is not always optimal and there is a gap in knowledge around how this can be addressed.This research focuses on a qualitative evaluation of the nature and efficacy of the engagement of IPC teams in the construction lifecycle development of new hospitals. Using in-depth interview data, the experiences of IPC team members will be explored and barriers and facilitators to high quality engagement identified. This data will be used to develop the foundational principles of an improvement strategy for the engagement of IPC teams within the construction lifecycle development of new hospitals in the UK. Post-pandemic, the role of the built environment in the spread of infection and the processes developed to manage this will be under increased scrutiny. This paper adds to this growing body of research.

Designing an optimal infection prevention service: Part 1.

Healthcare-associated infections (HCAIs) pose a significant threat to the health and safety of patients, staff, and visitors. Infection prevention and control (IPC) teams play a crucial role in ensuring that systems and processes are in place to keep everyone safe within the healthcare environment. The aim of this study was to identify components of infection prevention services, priorities, indicators of successes and how they are measured, and facilitators and barriers to success. A survey questionnaire was developed and circulated to infection prevention leaders and managers. Seventy IPC leaders/managers completed the survey. Participants were responsible for a range of IPC services within and across healthcare organisations, with significant variations to IPC delivery components. Additionally, a range of budget availability was reported. Several IPC service requirements were considered core work of IPC teams, including providing IPC advice and support, surveillance and audit and education and training. An optimal IPC service needs to be in place to ensure HCAIs are minimised or prevented. In a post pandemic era, this is more important than ever before. This is also as crucial for the health and wellbeing of those working in IPC, who have endured unprecedented demand for their services during the pandemic.

Designing an optimal infection prevention service: Part 2.

The importance of infection prevention and control (IPC) services to prevent threats from healthcare-associated infections and improve the quality of healthcare delivery is undeniable. However, IPC services across the UK and Ireland have substantial variability in terms of team structures and delivery models. The aim of this study was to define an optimal IPC service in different contexts and settings within the United Kingdom and Ireland. This mixed methods study adopted discussion huddles with IPC teams to explore various components of IPC programmes and services. A Nominal Group technique was then undertaken to achieve a group consensus of what an optimal infection prevention service should look like. Five discussion huddles were conducted which included 53 participants in total. Key themes arising were IPC Service Priorities, IPC Service Enablers for Success, and Necessary Skills and Expertise Required for Delivering an Effective IPC Service. For the nominal technique, 45 responses were identified which were determining the key priorities for an effective IPC service and 69 responses for establishing key enablers for success. These findings supported the development of a conceptual model for designing an optimal infection prevention service, which can be used to develop IPC services at an international, national, regional and local level. A focus is required around implementation of these highlighted enablers, so are effectively embedded into infection prevention and control services, and wider healthcare settings.

The Implementation of Infection Prevention and Control at the Lubuklinggau City Community Health Center: An Observational Study

<p><strong>Introduction:</strong> Implementation of Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) is one of the characteristics of the quality of Health Care Services. Health care facilities must do the surveillance, IPC education and training. This aims to describe the implementation of IPC at the Lubuklinggau City Community Health Center (CHC).</p><p><strong>Methods:</strong> Descriptive qualitative study with a participant observation approach used.</p><p><strong>Result: </strong>The results showed that the priority problem was the ineffectiveness of the IPC team in implementing the IPC at the Lubuklinggau City CHC.</p><p><strong>Discussion:</strong> The preparation stage consists of socialization of IPC technical guidelines at CHC, assistance in implementing management and organization, assistance in disseminating policies, guidelines, SOPs, IPC, and IPC indicators, IPC implementation and reporting at the Primary Healthcare Facilities level, and IPC education and information at the level of health cadres and community leaders in every Health Center. The stages of monitoring and supervision are starting from the planning, implementation, and reporting stages. Evaluation is carried out with indicators of success in the form of accuracy and completeness of the report. Reporting is done at the end of the activity. Internal constraints that may occur are constraints on organizational culture, human resources, and funds, while external constraints include regional characteristics, reinforcing factors, and changing/accelerating factors. From these possible obstacles, strategies are made to overcome them.</p><p><strong>Conclusion:</strong> In this study, in order to further increase the effectiveness of the implementation of IPC at the Lubuklinggau City CHC, it is necessary to carry out continuous upgrading of the competence of health workers and IPC data at CHC.</p>