卢旺达 25 家医疗机构的感染预防与控制计划现状:世界卫生组织感染预防与控制评估框架的结果

Jean Jacques Irakiza, Christian Mazimpaka, Dieudonne Ndatimana, John Baptist Kalach, Vincent Hatangimbabazi, Edouard Kamuhangire, Alphonsine Mukamunana, Olive Ntakirutimana, Joseline Tengera, Olivier Ruhumuriza, Onesime Manishimwe, A. Mwali, E. Rutayisire
{"title":"卢旺达 25 家医疗机构的感染预防与控制计划现状:世界卫生组织感染预防与控制评估框架的结果","authors":"Jean Jacques Irakiza, Christian Mazimpaka, Dieudonne Ndatimana, John Baptist Kalach, Vincent Hatangimbabazi, Edouard Kamuhangire, Alphonsine Mukamunana, Olive Ntakirutimana, Joseline Tengera, Olivier Ruhumuriza, Onesime Manishimwe, A. Mwali, E. Rutayisire","doi":"10.1002/puh2.183","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Infection prevention and control (IPC) is important in ensuring patient safety, protecting healthcare workers, and reducing healthcare‐associated costs. The World Health Organization (WHO)‐validated Infection Prevention and Control Assessment Framework (IPCAF) was used to evaluate IPC practices in Rwandan healthcare facilities.In this cross‐sectional study, we assessed 25 health facilities across Rwanda, including district and referral hospitals. Using the IPCAF tool, we assessed eight core components (CCs) of IPC programs. We calculated median scores and interquartile ranges to determine the levels of implementation of IPC practices.Among the 25 facilities, all showed some degree of IPCAF implementation, with an overall median IPCAF score of 545.0, reflecting an intermediate level. Three facilities (12%) were at a basic level, 16 (64%) at an intermediate level, and 6 (24%) at an advanced level of IPC practices. The presence of IPC guidelines scored the highest among CCs (median: 87.5). About 96% of facilities did not have a dedicated full‐time IPC staff, 64% of facilities did not offer IPC training to new staff, and 84% did not have protocols for multidrug‐resistant pathogens.This initial IPCAF assessment in Rwanda reveals critical IPC strengths and gaps. These findings highlight the necessity for targeted interventions, such as appointing dedicated IPC staff, strengthening IPC committees, and enhancing IPC training and resources.","PeriodicalId":74613,"journal":{"name":"Public health challenges","volume":"31 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Status of infection prevention and control programs in 25 facilities of Rwanda: Results from the WHO infection prevention and control assessment framework\",\"authors\":\"Jean Jacques Irakiza, Christian Mazimpaka, Dieudonne Ndatimana, John Baptist Kalach, Vincent Hatangimbabazi, Edouard Kamuhangire, Alphonsine Mukamunana, Olive Ntakirutimana, Joseline Tengera, Olivier Ruhumuriza, Onesime Manishimwe, A. Mwali, E. Rutayisire\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/puh2.183\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Infection prevention and control (IPC) is important in ensuring patient safety, protecting healthcare workers, and reducing healthcare‐associated costs. The World Health Organization (WHO)‐validated Infection Prevention and Control Assessment Framework (IPCAF) was used to evaluate IPC practices in Rwandan healthcare facilities.In this cross‐sectional study, we assessed 25 health facilities across Rwanda, including district and referral hospitals. Using the IPCAF tool, we assessed eight core components (CCs) of IPC programs. We calculated median scores and interquartile ranges to determine the levels of implementation of IPC practices.Among the 25 facilities, all showed some degree of IPCAF implementation, with an overall median IPCAF score of 545.0, reflecting an intermediate level. Three facilities (12%) were at a basic level, 16 (64%) at an intermediate level, and 6 (24%) at an advanced level of IPC practices. The presence of IPC guidelines scored the highest among CCs (median: 87.5). About 96% of facilities did not have a dedicated full‐time IPC staff, 64% of facilities did not offer IPC training to new staff, and 84% did not have protocols for multidrug‐resistant pathogens.This initial IPCAF assessment in Rwanda reveals critical IPC strengths and gaps. These findings highlight the necessity for targeted interventions, such as appointing dedicated IPC staff, strengthening IPC committees, and enhancing IPC training and resources.\",\"PeriodicalId\":74613,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Public health challenges\",\"volume\":\"31 12\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Public health challenges\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/puh2.183\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public health challenges","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/puh2.183","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

感染预防与控制(IPC)对于确保患者安全、保护医护人员和降低医疗相关成本非常重要。在这项横断面研究中,我们对卢旺达的 25 家医疗机构进行了评估,其中包括地区医院和转诊医院。利用 IPCAF 工具,我们评估了 IPC 计划的八个核心组成部分 (CC)。在这 25 家医疗机构中,所有医疗机构都在一定程度上实施了 IPCAF,IPCAF 的总得分中位数为 545.0,处于中等水平。在 IPC 实践方面,3 家机构(12%)处于基础水平,16 家机构(64%)处于中等水平,6 家机构(24%)处于高级水平。在社区协调中心中,IPC指南的存在情况得分最高(中位数:87.5)。约 96% 的医疗机构没有专职的 IPC 工作人员,64% 的医疗机构没有为新员工提供 IPC 培训,84% 的医疗机构没有针对耐多药病原体的规程。卢旺达 IPCAF 的初步评估揭示了 IPC 的关键优势和差距。这些评估结果突出表明,有必要采取有针对性的干预措施,如任命 IPC 专职人员、加强 IPC 委员会、加强 IPC 培训和资源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Status of infection prevention and control programs in 25 facilities of Rwanda: Results from the WHO infection prevention and control assessment framework
Infection prevention and control (IPC) is important in ensuring patient safety, protecting healthcare workers, and reducing healthcare‐associated costs. The World Health Organization (WHO)‐validated Infection Prevention and Control Assessment Framework (IPCAF) was used to evaluate IPC practices in Rwandan healthcare facilities.In this cross‐sectional study, we assessed 25 health facilities across Rwanda, including district and referral hospitals. Using the IPCAF tool, we assessed eight core components (CCs) of IPC programs. We calculated median scores and interquartile ranges to determine the levels of implementation of IPC practices.Among the 25 facilities, all showed some degree of IPCAF implementation, with an overall median IPCAF score of 545.0, reflecting an intermediate level. Three facilities (12%) were at a basic level, 16 (64%) at an intermediate level, and 6 (24%) at an advanced level of IPC practices. The presence of IPC guidelines scored the highest among CCs (median: 87.5). About 96% of facilities did not have a dedicated full‐time IPC staff, 64% of facilities did not offer IPC training to new staff, and 84% did not have protocols for multidrug‐resistant pathogens.This initial IPCAF assessment in Rwanda reveals critical IPC strengths and gaps. These findings highlight the necessity for targeted interventions, such as appointing dedicated IPC staff, strengthening IPC committees, and enhancing IPC training and resources.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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