Journals / Journal of Immunology and Clinical Microbiology / 2019 / Cilt: 4 - Sayı: 3

Investigation of hospital-acquired infections in units other than the intensive care unit

Pages
59–68
Publication Date
2019-09-30
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Results: The overall HAI rate was 0.17%.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Backround: Hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) are issues for not only patients who get treatment in the intensive care unit but also for patients who are being treated in internal medicine and surgical departments.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and Methods: Data of the patients who developed hospital infections between January 2014 and December 2017 were evaluated retrospectively.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Results: The overall HAI rate was 0.17%.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2014 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Hospital-acquired infections · prevalence · McCabe score

Abstract

Backround: Hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) are issues for not only patients who get treatment in the intensive care unit but also for patients who are being treated in internal medicine and surgical departments. HAIs cause functional disorders, less life quality or even death. The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence of HAIs, distribution of the infections, and isolated microorganisms in units other than the intensive care units (ICU). Materials and Methods: Data of the patients who developed hospital infections between January 2014 and December 2017 were evaluated retrospectively. The McCabe score was used for categorical evaluation. Results: The overall HAI rate was 0.17%. Of these, 619 (53.1%) occurred in departments other than the intensive care units. The most common HAI was surgical site infection (n: 223, 36%) followed by urinary tract infection (n: 176, 28.4%) and pneumonia (n: 125, 20.2%). According to patients' comorbid disease status, 48% (n: 297) was McCabe class 1, 30% (n: 186) was McCabe class 2, and 22% (n:136) was McCabe is class 3. In 85 (13.7%) of 619 HAI cases, the agent could not be isolated, and the diagnosis of HAI was based on clinical findings. Four-hundred-ninety-two bacteria were isolated and 409 (83.1%) were gram-negative whereas 83 (16.9%) were gram-positive. Conclusions: HAIs are important health problems not only for patients in intensive care units, but also for patients who are treated in services. It was thought that the characteristics of the concomitant diseases need to be taken into consideration in preventing hospital infections.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÇALIK, Ş., ARI, A., AY, B., ERGİN, Ö. Y., TOSUN, S. (2019). Investigation of hospital-acquired infections in units other than the intensive care unit. Journal of Immunology and Clinical Microbiology, Cilt: 4 - Sayı: 3, 59–68. https://ajindex.com/articles/835959

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (2)

  1. References1.Alp E, Leblebicioglu H, Doganay M, Voss A. Infection control practice in conutries with limited resources. Ann ClinMicrobiolAntimicrob. 2011;10:36.2.Vincent JL, Rello J, Marshall J, et al.International study of the prevalence and outcomes of infection in intensive care units. JAMA 2009; 302(21):2323–29.3.Emori TG, Culver DH, Horan TC, Jarvis WR, White JW, Olson DR et al. National nosocomial infections surveillance system (NNIS): description of surveillance methods. Am J Infect Control. 1991;19(1):19-35.4.Öztürk R. Recent Developments related to Infection Control in Turkey. ANKEM Derg.2011;25(Ek 2):9-16.Available from: https://www.ankemdernegi.org.tr/ANKEMJOURNALPDF/ANKEM_25_Ek2_0_0.pdf5.TC Sayıştay Bakanlığı Performans Denetimi Raporu. Hastane enfeksiyonları ile mücadele. Erişim: http://www.hider.org.tr/Yeniden/2007-2hastaneenfeksiyon.Pdf6.Turkish Republic Health Instution Department of Infectious Diseases. Agent distribution and antibiotic resistance surveillance report for national healthcare-associated infections 2017. Available from: https://infline.saglik.gov.tr/7.Reilly
  2. JS, Coignard B, Price L, Godwin J, Cairns S, Hopkins S et al.The reliability of the McCabe score as a marker of co-morbidity in healthcare associated infection point prevalence studies. J Infect Prev. 2016;17(3):127-9.8.Horan TC, Andrus M, Dudeck MA. CDC/NHSN surveillance definition of health care-associated infection and criteria for specific types of infections in the acute care setting. Am J Infect Control. 2008; 36(5):309-32.9.Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (2013) Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing, Twenty-Third Informational Supplement. Avaliable at: https://clsi.org/media/2663/m100ed29_sample.pdf 10.Dereli N, Ozayar E, Degerli S, Sahin S, Koç F. Three-year evaluation of nosocomial infection rates of the ICU. Braz J Anesthesiol. 2013;63(1):73-811.Erdem H, Inan A, Altındis S, Carevic B, Askarian M, Cottle L, et al. Surveillance, control and management of infections in intensive care units in Southern Europe, Turkey and Iran--a prospective multicenter point prevalence study. J Infect. 2014;68(2):131-40.12.Erdem H, Dizbay M, Karabey S, Kaya S, Demirdal T, Koksal I, et al. Withdrawal of Staphylocoocus aureus from intensive care units in Turkey. Am J Infect Control. 2013;41(11):1053-8.13.Tukenmez Tigen E, Dogru A, Koltka EN, Unlu C, Gura M. Device-associated nosocomial infection rates and distribution of antimicrobial resistance in