2021年10月至12月在台湾自愿监测系统中对中心线相关血流感染数据进行试点验证

IF 1.8 Q3 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Hao-Hsin Wu , Shu-Ling Chang , Chiu-Hsia Su , Shu-Hui Tseng , Li-Jung Chien
{"title":"2021年10月至12月在台湾自愿监测系统中对中心线相关血流感染数据进行试点验证","authors":"Hao-Hsin Wu ,&nbsp;Shu-Ling Chang ,&nbsp;Chiu-Hsia Su ,&nbsp;Shu-Hui Tseng ,&nbsp;Li-Jung Chien","doi":"10.1016/j.infpip.2023.100326","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) surveillance data are voluntarily submitted to the Taiwan Healthcare-associated Infection and Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance (THAS) System. Validation of the CLABSI data is important to ensure the quality of surveillance data. We aimed to validate the CLABSI surveillance data reported to the THAS system.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This study was a retrospective medical record review of patients with positive blood cultures admitted to the intensive care units (ICUs) of 13 participating hospitals between October and December 2021. An external validation team was convened to perform the validation process according to the standardised protocol and to record the reasons for misclassification.</p></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><p>During the study period, 688 patients with 1,238 positive blood cultures from 59 ICUs at 13 hospitals were evaluated. Among the 185 potential CLABSI events which met the THAS definition by either the external reviewers or the hospital reviewers, 24 (13.0%) events were identified by only the external reviewers, and six (3.2%) were identified by only the hospital reviewers, with an agreement rate of 83.8%. Using external reviewers as the gold standard, the pooled mean sensitivity and positive predictive value of CLABSI reporting were 86.6% (155/179) and 96.3% (155/161), respectively. Among the 37 misclassification episodes, missed case findings were the most common reason for misclassification (<em>N=</em>16, 43.2%).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The CLABSI data reported to the THAS system are generally reliable. This study showed the need for ongoing validation processes and quality improvement to maintain the accuracy and validity of the surveillance data.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":33492,"journal":{"name":"Infection Prevention in Practice","volume":"6 1","pages":"Article 100326"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590088923000598/pdfft?md5=c8ba42bb6c4c6ee253cbfe653ddf6920&pid=1-s2.0-S2590088923000598-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pilot validation of central line-associated bloodstream infection data in a voluntary surveillance system in Taiwan between October and December 2021\",\"authors\":\"Hao-Hsin Wu ,&nbsp;Shu-Ling Chang ,&nbsp;Chiu-Hsia Su ,&nbsp;Shu-Hui Tseng ,&nbsp;Li-Jung Chien\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.infpip.2023.100326\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) surveillance data are voluntarily submitted to the Taiwan Healthcare-associated Infection and Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance (THAS) System. Validation of the CLABSI data is important to ensure the quality of surveillance data. We aimed to validate the CLABSI surveillance data reported to the THAS system.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This study was a retrospective medical record review of patients with positive blood cultures admitted to the intensive care units (ICUs) of 13 participating hospitals between October and December 2021. An external validation team was convened to perform the validation process according to the standardised protocol and to record the reasons for misclassification.</p></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><p>During the study period, 688 patients with 1,238 positive blood cultures from 59 ICUs at 13 hospitals were evaluated. Among the 185 potential CLABSI events which met the THAS definition by either the external reviewers or the hospital reviewers, 24 (13.0%) events were identified by only the external reviewers, and six (3.2%) were identified by only the hospital reviewers, with an agreement rate of 83.8%. Using external reviewers as the gold standard, the pooled mean sensitivity and positive predictive value of CLABSI reporting were 86.6% (155/179) and 96.3% (155/161), respectively. Among the 37 misclassification episodes, missed case findings were the most common reason for misclassification (<em>N=</em>16, 43.2%).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The CLABSI data reported to the THAS system are generally reliable. This study showed the need for ongoing validation processes and quality improvement to maintain the accuracy and validity of the surveillance data.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":33492,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Infection Prevention in Practice\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"Article 100326\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590088923000598/pdfft?md5=c8ba42bb6c4c6ee253cbfe653ddf6920&pid=1-s2.0-S2590088923000598-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Infection Prevention in Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590088923000598\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Infection Prevention in Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590088923000598","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

中心静脉相关血流感染(CLABSI)监测数据自愿提交给台湾卫生保健相关感染和抗菌素耐药性监测(THAS)系统。CLABSI数据的验证对于确保监测数据的质量非常重要。我们的目的是验证报告给THAS系统的CLABSI监测数据。本研究是对13家参与医院2021年10月至12月入住重症监护病房(icu)的血培养阳性患者的回顾性医疗记录进行审查。召集外部验证小组,根据标准化方案执行验证过程,并记录错误分类的原因。在研究期间,对来自13家医院59个icu的688例患者的1238例血培养阳性进行了评估。在185个外部审稿人或医院审稿人符合THAS定义的潜在CLABSI事件中,24个(13.0%)事件仅由外部审稿人确定,6个(3.2%)事件仅由医院审稿人确定,符合率为83.8%。以外部审稿人为金标准,CLABSI报告的汇总平均敏感性和阳性预测值分别为86.6%(155/179)和96.3%(155/161)。在37例误诊事件中,漏诊是最常见的误诊原因(n=16, 43.2%)。向THAS系统报告的CLABSI数据通常是可靠的。这项研究表明需要持续的验证过程和质量改进,以保持监测数据的准确性和有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Pilot validation of central line-associated bloodstream infection data in a voluntary surveillance system in Taiwan between October and December 2021

Background

Central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) surveillance data are voluntarily submitted to the Taiwan Healthcare-associated Infection and Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance (THAS) System. Validation of the CLABSI data is important to ensure the quality of surveillance data. We aimed to validate the CLABSI surveillance data reported to the THAS system.

Methods

This study was a retrospective medical record review of patients with positive blood cultures admitted to the intensive care units (ICUs) of 13 participating hospitals between October and December 2021. An external validation team was convened to perform the validation process according to the standardised protocol and to record the reasons for misclassification.

Discussion

During the study period, 688 patients with 1,238 positive blood cultures from 59 ICUs at 13 hospitals were evaluated. Among the 185 potential CLABSI events which met the THAS definition by either the external reviewers or the hospital reviewers, 24 (13.0%) events were identified by only the external reviewers, and six (3.2%) were identified by only the hospital reviewers, with an agreement rate of 83.8%. Using external reviewers as the gold standard, the pooled mean sensitivity and positive predictive value of CLABSI reporting were 86.6% (155/179) and 96.3% (155/161), respectively. Among the 37 misclassification episodes, missed case findings were the most common reason for misclassification (N=16, 43.2%).

Conclusions

The CLABSI data reported to the THAS system are generally reliable. This study showed the need for ongoing validation processes and quality improvement to maintain the accuracy and validity of the surveillance data.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Infection Prevention in Practice
Infection Prevention in Practice Medicine-Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
58
审稿时长
61 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信