Successful strategies for high participation in three regional healthcare surveys: an observational study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Regional healthcare facility surveys to quantitatively assess nosocomial infection rates are important for confirming standardized data collection and assessing health outcomes in the era of mandatory reporting. This is particularly important for the assessment of infection control policies and healthcare associated infection rates among hospitals. However, the success of such surveys depends upon high participation and representativeness of respondents.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This descriptive paper provides methodologies that may have contributed to high participation in a series of administrative, infection control, and microbiology laboratory surveys of all 31 hospitals in a large southern California county. We also report 85% (N = 72) countywide participation in an administrative survey among nursing homes in this same area.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Using in-person recruitment, 48% of hospitals and nursing homes were recruited within one quarter, with 75% recruited within three quarters.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Potentially useful strategies for successful recruitment included in-person recruitment, partnership with the local public health department, assurance of anonymity when presenting survey results, and provision of staff labor for the completion of detailed survey tables on the rates of healthcare associated pathogens. Data collection assistance was provided for three-fourths of surveys. High compliance quantitative regional surveys require substantial recruitment time and study staff support for high participation.</p

Evaluation of Indirect Fluorescent Antibody Assays Compared to Rapid Influenza Diagnostic Tests for the Detection of Pandemic Influenza A (H1N1) pdm09

Performance of indirect fluorescent antibody (IFA) assays and rapid influenza diagnostic tests (RIDT) during the 2009 H1N1 pandemic was evaluated, along with the relative effects of age and illness severity on test accuracy. Clinicians and laboratories submitted specimens on patients with respiratory illness to public health from April to mid October 2009 for polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing as part of pandemic H1N1 surveillance efforts in Orange County, CA; IFA and RIDT were performed in clinical settings. Sensitivity and specificity for detection of the 2009 pandemic H1N1 strain, now officially named influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, were calculated for 638 specimens. Overall, approximately 30% of IFA tests and RIDTs tested by PCR were falsely negative (sensitivity 71% and 69%, respectively). Sensitivity of RIDT ranged from 45% to 84% depending on severity and age of patients. In hospitalized children, sensitivity of IFA (75%) was similar to RIDT (84%). Specificity of tests performed on hospitalized children was 94% for IFA and 80% for RIDT. Overall sensitivity of RIDT in this study was comparable to previously published studies on pandemic H1N1 influenza and sensitivity of IFA was similar to what has been reported in children for seasonal influenza. Both diagnostic tests produced a high number of false negatives and should not be used to rule out influenza infection

Protective effect of methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus carriage against methicillin-resistant S. aureus acquisition in nursing homes: a prospective cross-sectional study.

ObjectiveTo evaluate whether an ecologic inverse association exists between methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) prevalence and methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) prevalence in nursing homes.MethodsWe conducted a secondary analysis of a prospective cross-sectional study of S. aureus prevalence in 26 nursing homes across Orange County, California, from 2008-2011. Admission prevalence was assessed using bilateral nares swabs collected from all new residents within 3 days of admission until 100 swabs were obtained. Point prevalence was assessed from a representative sample of 100 residents. Swab samples were plated on 5% sheep blood agar and Spectra MRSA chromogenic agar. If MRSA was detected, no further tests were performed. If MRSA was not detected, blood agar was evaluated for MSSA growth. We evaluated the association between MRSA and MSSA admission and point prevalence using correlation and linear regression testing.ResultsWe collected 3,806 total swabs. MRSA and MSSA admission prevalence were not correlated (r = -0.40, P = .09). However, MRSA and MSSA point prevalence were negatively correlated regardless of whether MSSA prevalence was measured among all residents sampled (r = -0.67, P = .0002) or among those who did not harbor MRSA (r = -0.41, P = .04). This effect persisted in regression models adjusted for the percentage of residents with diabetes (β = -0.73, P = .04), skin lesions (β = -1.17, P = .002), or invasive devices (β = -1.4, P = .0006).ConclusionsThe inverse association between MRSA and MSSA point prevalence and minimal association on admission prevalence suggest MSSA carriage may protect against MRSA acquisition in nursing homes. The minimal association on admission prevalence further suggests competition may occur during nursing home stays

Protective effect of methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus carriage against methicillin-resistant S. aureus acquisition in nursing homes: a prospective cross-sectional study.

ObjectiveTo evaluate whether an ecologic inverse association exists between methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) prevalence and methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) prevalence in nursing homes.MethodsWe conducted a secondary analysis of a prospective cross-sectional study of S. aureus prevalence in 26 nursing homes across Orange County, California, from 2008-2011. Admission prevalence was assessed using bilateral nares swabs collected from all new residents within 3 days of admission until 100 swabs were obtained. Point prevalence was assessed from a representative sample of 100 residents. Swab samples were plated on 5% sheep blood agar and Spectra MRSA chromogenic agar. If MRSA was detected, no further tests were performed. If MRSA was not detected, blood agar was evaluated for MSSA growth. We evaluated the association between MRSA and MSSA admission and point prevalence using correlation and linear regression testing.ResultsWe collected 3,806 total swabs. MRSA and MSSA admission prevalence were not correlated (r = -0.40, P = .09). However, MRSA and MSSA point prevalence were negatively correlated regardless of whether MSSA prevalence was measured among all residents sampled (r = -0.67, P = .0002) or among those who did not harbor MRSA (r = -0.41, P = .04). This effect persisted in regression models adjusted for the percentage of residents with diabetes (β = -0.73, P = .04), skin lesions (β = -1.17, P = .002), or invasive devices (β = -1.4, P = .0006).ConclusionsThe inverse association between MRSA and MSSA point prevalence and minimal association on admission prevalence suggest MSSA carriage may protect against MRSA acquisition in nursing homes. The minimal association on admission prevalence further suggests competition may occur during nursing home stays

Sensitivity of IFA tests and RIDTs for the detection of pandemic H1N1 influenza.

<p>Sensitivity was calculated using real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction as the gold standard. IFA results for other groups were not available due to lack of data.</p

What is nosocomial? Large variation in hospital choice of numerators and denominators affects rates of hospital-onset methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.

We calculated hospital-onset methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (HO-MRSA) rates for Orange County, California, hospitals using survey and state data. Numerators were variably defined as HO-MRSA occurring more than 48 hours (37%), more than 2 days (30%), and more than 3 days (33%) postadmission. Survey-reported denominators differed from state-reported patient-days. Numerator and denominator choices substantially impacted HO-MRSA rates

Comparison of Specificity for RIDT and IFA Tests by Severity and Age using PCR as the Gold Standard.

<p>Comparison of Specificity for RIDT and IFA Tests by Severity and Age using PCR as the Gold Standard.</p

Comparison of Sensitivity for RIDT and IFA Tests by Severity and Age using PCR as the Gold Standard.

<p>Comparison of Sensitivity for RIDT and IFA Tests by Severity and Age using PCR as the Gold Standard.</p