Search

Background Hospital acquired pneumonia (HAP) is divided in two distinct groups, ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) and non-ventilator-associated HAP (nvHAP). Although nvHAP occurs more frequently than VAP and results in similar mortality and costs, prevention guidelines and prevention focus almost exclusively on VAP. Scientific evidence about nvHAP prevention and its implementation is scarce. Therefore, we designed a mixed-methods hybrid type 2 effectiveness-implementation study to investigate both the effectiveness and implementation of a newly developed nvHAP prevention bundle. Methods This single-centre project at the 950-bed University Hospital Zurich (UHZ) will engage the wards of nine departments with substantial nvHAP rates. The nvHAP bundle consists of five primary prevention measures: 1) oral care, 2) prevention of dysphagia-related aspiration, 3) mobilization, 4) stopping unnecessary proton pump inhibitors, and, 5) respiratory therapy. Implementation includes the engagement of department-level implementation teams, who sustain the ‘core’ intervention components of education, training, and environmental restructuring and tailor the implementation strategy to local needs. Both effectiveness and implementation outcomes will be assessed using mixed-methods. As a primary outcome, nvHAP incidence rates will be analysed by Poisson regression models to compare incidence rates before, during, and after the implementation phases (on the hospital and department level). Additionally, the association between process indicators and nvHAP incidence rates will be analysed using longitudinal Poisson regression models. A longitudinal, qualitative study and formative evaluation based on interviews, focus groups, and observations identifies supporting or hindering factors for implementation success in participating departments dynamically over time. This accumulating implementation experience will be constantly fed back to the implementation teams and thus, represents an active implementation element. Discussion This comprehensive hybrid mixed-methods study is designed to both, measure the effectiveness of a new nvHAP prevention bundle and multifaceted implementation strategy, while also providing insights into how and why it worked or failed. The results of this study may contribute substantially to advancing knowledge and patient safety in the area of a rediscovered healthcare-associated infection - nvHAP. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03361085. Registered December 2017.

Background Standard precautions are essential to prevent pathogen transmission and nosocomial infections. We assessed learning effect (primary outcome) and satisfaction (secondary outcome) of watching a 5-min humorous “edutainment (=education and entertainment) video” on Standard Precautions compared to reading a written standard operating procedure (SOP) or receiving no intervention. Methods This randomized controlled trial was executed at the University Hospital Zurich, Switzerland, a tertiary care centre with a state-of-the-art infection prevention programme. Healthcare providers (HCPs) of different medical departments were 1:1:1 randomized to watching the edutainment video (video group), reading the SOP (SOP group), or no study-specific intervention (no-intervention group). Online questionnaires included a knowledge assessment about Standard Precautions at time point (TP) 1 immediately after intervention, TP2 after 1 month, and TP3 after 3 months. Information about HCPs’ satisfaction with the learning method was collected. Variables were assessed within and between groups using the appropriate non-parametric tests. Predictors for knowledge of Standard Precautions were assessed by uni- and multivariable linear regression. Results Overall, 363 predominantly female (78.2%) HCPs were included. At TP 1 and TP3, the video group scored better on the knowledge assessment against both the SOP and the no-intervention group (TP1 p

ObjectivePreventing ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is an important goal for intensive care units (ICUs). We aimed to identify the optimal behavior leverage to improve VAP prevention protocol adherence.DesignMixed-method study using adherence measurements to assess 4 VAP prevention measures and qualitative analysis of semi-structured focus group interviews with frontline healthcare practitioners (HCPs).SettingThe 6 ICUs in the 900-bed University Hospital Zurich in Zurich, Switzerland.Patients and participantsAdherence to VAP prevention measures were assessed in patients with a device for invasive ventilation (ie, endotracheal tube, tracheostomy tube). Participants in focus group interviews included a convenience samples of ICU nurses and physicians.ResultsBetween February 2015 and July 2017, we measured adherence to 4 protocols: bed elevation showed adherence at 27% (95% confidence intervals [CI], 23%–31%); oral care at 41% (95% CI, 36%–45%); sedation interruption at 81% (95% CI, 74%–85%); and subglottic suctioning at 88% (95% CI, 83%–92%). Interviews were analyzed first inductively according a grounded theory approach then deductively against the behavior change wheel (BCW) framework. Main behavioral facilitators belonged to the BCW component ‘reflective motivation’ (ie, perceived seriousness of VAP and self-efficacy to prevent VAP). The main barriers belonged to ‘physical capability’ (ie, lack of equipment and staffing and side-effects of prevention measures). Furthermore, 2 primarily technical approaches (ie, ‘restructuring environment’ and ‘enabling HCP’) emerged as means to overcome these barriers.ConclusionsOur findings suggest that technical, rather than education-based, solutions should be promoted to improve VAP prevention. This theory-informed mixed-method approach is an effective means of guiding infection prevention efforts.

As surveillance of hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) is very resource intensive, alternatives for HAP surveillance are needed urgently. This study compared HAP rates according to routine discharge diagnostic codes of the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10; ICD-HAP) with HAP rates according to the validated surveillance definitions of the Hospitals in Europe Link for Infection Control through Surveillance (HELICS/IPSE; HELICS-HAP) by manual retrospective re-evaluation of patient records. The positive predictive value of ICD-HAP for HELICS-HAP was 0.35, and sensitivity was 0.59. Therefore, the currently available ICD-10-based routine discharge data do not allow reliable identification of patients with HAP.