Search

Infection prevention and control (IPC) professionals are key intermediaries between hospital managers and frontline staff. During the novel coronavirus disease pandemic, IPC professionals faced new challenges. Unfortunately, research on human resource management (HRM) to support IPC during and between pandemics is lacking. Therefore, this scoping review aimed to elucidate the existing knowledge on HRM measures in this context and thus contribute to the pandemic preparedness of healthcare facilities. It was conducted as part of the "PREparedness and PAndemic REsponse in Germany (PREPARED)" project within the Network University Medicine (NUM), using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist. PubMed was searched without time restriction until 2023 (filter: English, German). Two reviewers assessed titles/abstracts and full texts, respectively. A total of nine publications were included, eight of which were published in the USA. All publications reported survey data (quantitative: six). Measures targeting personnel development and the qualification of IPC personnel were reported in six studies, i.e., almost two-thirds of the studies, of which five focused on the tasks of IPC professionals. In contrast, management of personnel costs and remuneration systems were reported less frequently (three studies), and only regarding issues around retention, compensation and dismissal. In conclusion, research gaps include trials on implementation and effectiveness of HRM for IPC. Given the increasing shortage of IPC professionals, HRM measures during and between pandemics become more important for establishing pandemic preparedness., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Surgical site infections (SSIs) are highly prevalent in abdominal surgery despite evidence-based prevention measures. Since guidelines are not self-implementing and SSI-preventive compliance is often insufficient, implementation interventions have been developed to promote compliance. This systematic review aims to identify implementation interventions used in abdominal surgery to prevent SSIs and determine associations with SSI reductions., Methods: Literature was searched in April 2018 (Medline/PubMed and Web of Science Core Collection). Implementation interventions were classified using the implementation subcategories of the EPOC Taxonomy (Cochrane Review Group Effective Practice and Organisation of Care, EPOC). Additionally, an effectiveness analysis was conducted on the association between the number of implementation interventions, specific compositions thereof, and absolute and relative SSI risk reductions., Results: Forty studies were included. Implementation interventions used most frequently ("top five") were audit and feedback (80% of studies), organizational culture (70%), monitoring the performance of healthcare delivery (65%), reminders (53%), and educational meetings (45%). Twenty-nine studies (72.5%) used a multimodal strategy (≥3 interventions). An effectiveness analysis revealed significant absolute and relative SSI risk reductions. E.g., numerically, the largest absolute risk reduction of 10.8% pertained to thirteen studies using 3-5 interventions (p < .001); however, this was from a higher baseline rate than those with fewer or more interventions. The largest relative risk reduction was 52.4% for studies employing the top five interventions, compared to 43.1% for those not including these. Furthermore, neither the differences in risk reduction between studies with different numbers of implementation interventions (bundle size) nor between studies including the top five interventions (vs. not) were significant., Conclusion: In SSI prevention in abdominal surgery, mostly standard bundles of implementation interventions are applied. While an effectiveness analysis of differences in SSI risk reduction by number and type of interventions did not render conclusive results, use of standard interventions such as audit and feedback, organizational culture, monitoring, reminders, and education at least does not seem to represent preventive malpractice. Further research should determine implementation interventions, or bundles thereof, which are most effective in promoting compliance with SSI-preventive measures in abdominal surgery.