Do we need to change catheter-related bloodstream infection surveillance in the Netherlands? A qualitative study among infection prevention professionals

Objectives Catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSI) are a common healthcare-associated infection and therefore targeted by surveillance programmes in many countries. Concerns, however, have been voiced regarding the reliability and construct validity of CRBSI surveillance and the connection with the current diagnostic procedures. The aim of this study was to explore the experiences of infection control practitioners (ICPs) and medical professionals with the current CRBSI surveillance in the Netherlands and their suggestions for improvement. Design Qualitative study using focus group dis... Mehr ...

Verfasser: Verberk, Janneke DM
van der Kooi, Tjallie II
Derde, Lennie PG
Bonten, Marc JM
de Greeff, Sabine C
van Mourik, Maaike SM
Dokumenttyp: Artikel
Erscheinungsdatum: 2021
Reihe/Periodikum: BMJ Open ; volume 11, issue 8, page e046366 ; ISSN 2044-6055 2044-6055
Verlag/Hrsg.: BMJ
Schlagwörter: General Medicine
Sprache: Englisch
Permalink: https://search.fid-benelux.de/Record/base-27215607
Datenquelle: BASE; Originalkatalog
Powered By: BASE
Link(s) : http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-046366

Objectives Catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSI) are a common healthcare-associated infection and therefore targeted by surveillance programmes in many countries. Concerns, however, have been voiced regarding the reliability and construct validity of CRBSI surveillance and the connection with the current diagnostic procedures. The aim of this study was to explore the experiences of infection control practitioners (ICPs) and medical professionals with the current CRBSI surveillance in the Netherlands and their suggestions for improvement. Design Qualitative study using focus group discussions (FGDs) with ICPs and medical professionals separately, followed by semistructured interviews to investigate whether the points raised in the FGDs were recognised and confirmed by the interviewees. Analyses were performed using thematic analyses. Setting Basic, teaching and academic hospitals in the Netherlands. Participants 24 ICPs and 9 medical professionals. Results Main themes derived from experiences with current surveillance were (1) ICPs’ doubt regarding the yield of surveillance given the low incidence of CRBSI, the high workload and IT problems; (2) the experienced lack of leadership and responsibility for recording information needed for surveillance and (3) difficulties with applying and interpreting the CRBSI definition. Suggestions were made to simplify the surveillance protocol, expand the follow-up and surveillance to homecare settings, simplify the definition and customise it for specific patient groups. Participants reported hoping for and counting on automatisation solutions to support future surveillance. Conclusions This study reveals several problems with the feasibility and acceptance of the current CRBSI surveillance and proposes several suggestions for improvement. This provides valuable input for future surveillance activities, thereby taking into account automation possibilities.