Annelotte Sussenbach, Haitske Graveland, Andreas Voss, Bart Versteeg
{"title":"为荷兰卫生保健专业人员制定感染预防和控制指南：对这一进程的评价。","authors":"Annelotte Sussenbach, Haitske Graveland, Andreas Voss, Bart Versteeg","doi":"10.1016/j.jhin.2025.06.012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Nosocomial infections in healthcare pose potentially life-threatening risks to patients and can drive up healthcare costs. To address this, the Dutch Collaborative Partnership for Infection Prevention Guidelines (SRI) creates evidence-based guidelines to reduce infections in hospitals, long-term care facilities, and public health settings (1). We evaluated professionals' experiences with the evidence-based guideline development process to gain insights into the feasibility of the current process.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Guideline development group (GDG) members from 2021-2022 were surveyed. Data on expectations prior to participation; experienced workload; satisfaction with the composition of the GDG, the guideline development process, and generic or domain-specific guidelines; and implementation factors, were collected and analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty of 168 (48%) members of 17 GDGs responded. Expectations were clear to 46 (57%) respondents prior to participating. Twenty-seven (34%) respondents found time investment higher than expected, especially literature screening. Seventy (88%) respondents agreed their association was represented sufficiently, and 69 (86%) reported there was sufficient knowledge on infection prevention. However, 25 (31%) respondents expressed that Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) is unsuitable to assess available evidence, although not offering alternatives. Thirty-two (40%) respondents wish for the adaptation of generic guidelines into domain-specific guidelines.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Respondents emphasized the need for adaptation of generic guidelines into domain-specific guidelines, implying the necessity to develop guidelines that closely align with the needs of the field. Addressing areas for improvement, such as workload management, methodological concerns, and implementation strategies, are crucial to optimize the development process and ensure the guidelines' impact on infection prevention.</p>","PeriodicalId":54806,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Hospital Infection","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Developing infection prevention and control guidelines for healthcare professionals in the Netherlands: an evaluation of the process.\",\"authors\":\"Annelotte Sussenbach, Haitske Graveland, Andreas Voss, Bart Versteeg\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jhin.2025.06.012\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Nosocomial infections in healthcare pose potentially life-threatening risks to patients and can drive up healthcare costs. To address this, the Dutch Collaborative Partnership for Infection Prevention Guidelines (SRI) creates evidence-based guidelines to reduce infections in hospitals, long-term care facilities, and public health settings (1). We evaluated professionals' experiences with the evidence-based guideline development process to gain insights into the feasibility of the current process.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Guideline development group (GDG) members from 2021-2022 were surveyed. Data on expectations prior to participation; experienced workload; satisfaction with the composition of the GDG, the guideline development process, and generic or domain-specific guidelines; and implementation factors, were collected and analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty of 168 (48%) members of 17 GDGs responded. Expectations were clear to 46 (57%) respondents prior to participating. Twenty-seven (34%) respondents found time investment higher than expected, especially literature screening. Seventy (88%) respondents agreed their association was represented sufficiently, and 69 (86%) reported there was sufficient knowledge on infection prevention. However, 25 (31%) respondents expressed that Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) is unsuitable to assess available evidence, although not offering alternatives. Thirty-two (40%) respondents wish for the adaptation of generic guidelines into domain-specific guidelines.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Respondents emphasized the need for adaptation of generic guidelines into domain-specific guidelines, implying the necessity to develop guidelines that closely align with the needs of the field. Addressing areas for improvement, such as workload management, methodological concerns, and implementation strategies, are crucial to optimize the development process and ensure the guidelines' impact on infection prevention.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54806,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Hospital Infection\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Hospital Infection\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2025.06.012\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Hospital Infection","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2025.06.012","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Developing infection prevention and control guidelines for healthcare professionals in the Netherlands: an evaluation of the process.
Background: Nosocomial infections in healthcare pose potentially life-threatening risks to patients and can drive up healthcare costs. To address this, the Dutch Collaborative Partnership for Infection Prevention Guidelines (SRI) creates evidence-based guidelines to reduce infections in hospitals, long-term care facilities, and public health settings (1). We evaluated professionals' experiences with the evidence-based guideline development process to gain insights into the feasibility of the current process.
Methods: Guideline development group (GDG) members from 2021-2022 were surveyed. Data on expectations prior to participation; experienced workload; satisfaction with the composition of the GDG, the guideline development process, and generic or domain-specific guidelines; and implementation factors, were collected and analyzed.
Results: Eighty of 168 (48%) members of 17 GDGs responded. Expectations were clear to 46 (57%) respondents prior to participating. Twenty-seven (34%) respondents found time investment higher than expected, especially literature screening. Seventy (88%) respondents agreed their association was represented sufficiently, and 69 (86%) reported there was sufficient knowledge on infection prevention. However, 25 (31%) respondents expressed that Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) is unsuitable to assess available evidence, although not offering alternatives. Thirty-two (40%) respondents wish for the adaptation of generic guidelines into domain-specific guidelines.
Conclusions: Respondents emphasized the need for adaptation of generic guidelines into domain-specific guidelines, implying the necessity to develop guidelines that closely align with the needs of the field. Addressing areas for improvement, such as workload management, methodological concerns, and implementation strategies, are crucial to optimize the development process and ensure the guidelines' impact on infection prevention.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Hospital Infection is the editorially independent scientific publication of the Healthcare Infection Society. The aim of the Journal is to publish high quality research and information relating to infection prevention and control that is relevant to an international audience.
The Journal welcomes submissions that relate to all aspects of infection prevention and control in healthcare settings. This includes submissions that:
provide new insight into the epidemiology, surveillance, or prevention and control of healthcare-associated infections and antimicrobial resistance in healthcare settings;
provide new insight into cleaning, disinfection and decontamination;
provide new insight into the design of healthcare premises;
describe novel aspects of outbreaks of infection;
throw light on techniques for effective antimicrobial stewardship;
describe novel techniques (laboratory-based or point of care) for the detection of infection or antimicrobial resistance in the healthcare setting, particularly if these can be used to facilitate infection prevention and control;
improve understanding of the motivations of safe healthcare behaviour, or describe techniques for achieving behavioural and cultural change;
improve understanding of the use of IT systems in infection surveillance and prevention and control.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
