Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T19:54:43.153Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An Electronic Catheter-Associated Urinary Tract Infection Surveillance Tool

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Julie A. Choudhuri ,
Ronald F. Pergamit ,
Jeannie D. Chan ,
Astrid B. Schreuder ,
Elizabeth McNamara ,
John B. Lynch  and
Timothy H. Dellit
Julie A. Choudhuri
Affiliation:
Department of Quality Improvement/Infection Control, Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, Washington
Ronald F. Pergamit
Affiliation:
Department of Quality Improvement/Infection Control, Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, Washington
Jeannie D. Chan
Affiliation:
Department of Pharmacy, Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, Washington
Astrid B. Schreuder
Affiliation:
Department of Quality Improvement/Infection Control, Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, Washington
Elizabeth McNamara
Affiliation:
Department of Quality Improvement/Infection Control, Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, Washington
John B. Lynch
Affiliation:
Department of Quality Improvement/Infection Control, Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, Washington
Timothy H. Dellit*
Affiliation:
Department of Quality Improvement/Infection Control, Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, Washington
*
Harborview Medical Center, Quality Improvement/Infection Control, Box 359778, 325 Ninth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104 ([email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective.

To develop and validate an electronic surveillance tool for catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTIs).

Design.

Retrospective cohort study.

Setting.

413-bed university-affiliated urban teaching hospital.

Methods.

An electronic surveillance tool was developed for CAUTI and urinary catheter utilization based on the objective components of the National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) definitions including fever, urinalysis, and urine culture. Results were compared to manual chart review by an infection preventionist (IP).

Results.

During January and February 2010, 204 positive urine cultures (≥103 colony-forming units/mL) were identified in 136 patients with indwelling urinary catheters during their hospitalization. The electronic surveillance tool detected 60 CAUTI cases and 7,098 catheter-days, yielding a CAUTI incidence rate of 8.5 per 1,000 catheter-days. Urinary catheter utilization ratios (Foley-days/patient-days) were: acute care units, 0.27 (3,637 of 13,229); intensive care units, 0.77 (3,461 of 4,469); and overall, 0.40 (7,098 of 17,698). In comparison, the IP identified 59 cases by manual review with a sensitivity of 51 of 59 (86.4%), specificity 136 of 145 (93.8%), and negative predictive value of 136 of 144 (94.4%). Fever was present in 54 of 59 (91.5%) of CAUTI cases identified manually, while subjective criteria were documented in only 6 of 59 (10.2%) infections. Agreement between the electronic surveillance and manual IP review was assessed as very good (k, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.71–0.89).

Conclusions.

We report an attempt at automating surveillance for CAUTI. With a high negative predictive value, the electronic tool allows for more efficient CAUTI surveillance and facilitates housewide trending of rates and catheter utilization. This approach should be validated in different patient populations.

Type
Original Article
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 32 , Issue 8 , August 2011 , pp. 757 - 762
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Klevens, RM, Edwards, JR, Richards, CL, et al.Estimating health care-associated infections and deaths in U.S. hospitals, 2002. Public Health Rep 2007;122:160–167.Google Scholar
2.Saint, S, Kowalski, CP, Kaufman, SR, et al.Preventing hospital-acquired urinary tract infection in the United States: a national study. Clin Infect Dis 2008;46:243–250.Google Scholar
3.Edwards, JR, Peterson, KD, Mu, Y, et al.National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) report: Data summary for 2006 through 2008, issued December 2009. Am J Infect Control 2009;37:783–805.Google Scholar
4.Horan, TC, Andrus, M, Dudeck, MA. CDC/NHSN surveillance definition of health care-associated infection and criteria for specific types of inifections in the acute care setting. Am J Infect Control 2008;36:309–332.Google Scholar
5.Klompas, M, Yokoe, DS. Automated surveillance of health care-associated infections. Clin Infect Dis 2009;48:1268–1275.Google Scholar
6.Woeltje, KF, Butler, AM, Goris, AJ, et al.Automated surveillance for central line–associated bloodstream infection in intensive care units. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2008;29:842–846.Google Scholar
7.Hota, B, Lin, M, Doherty, JA, et al.Formulation of a model for automating infection surveillance: algorithmic detection of central-line associated bloodstream infection. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2010;17:42–48.Google Scholar
8.Klompas, M, Kleinman, K, Platt, R. Development of an algorithm for surveillance of ventilator-associated pneumonia with electronic data and comparison of algorithm results with clinician diagnosis. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2008;29:31–37.Google Scholar
9.Wright, MO, Fisher, A, John, M, Reynolds, K, Peterson, LR, Robicsek, A. The electronic medical record as a tool for infection surveillance: successful automation of device-days. Am J Infect Control 2009;37:364–370.Google Scholar
10.Hooton, TM, Bradley, SF, Cardenas, DD, et al.Diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of catheter-associated urinary tract infection in adults: 2009 international clinical practice guidelines from the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis 2009;50:625–663.Google Scholar
11.Bouam, S, Girou, E, Brun-Buisson, C, Karadimas, H, Lepage, E. An intranet-based automated system for the surveillance of nosocomial infections: prospective validation compared with physicians' self-reports. Infect Contol Hosp Epidemiol 2003;24:51–55.Google Scholar
12.Landers, T, Apte, M, Hyman, S, Furuya, Y, Glied, S, Larson, E. A comparison of methods to detect urinary tract infections using electronic data. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2010;36:411–417.Google Scholar
13.Chenoweth, CE, Saint, S. Urinary tract infections. In Jarvis, WR, ed. Bennett & Brachmans's hospital infections. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins;2007:507–516.Google Scholar