Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T02:04:20.372Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Quality Assurance, Infection Surveillance, and Hospital Information Systems Avoiding the Bermuda Triangle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

R. Mertens  and
W. Ceusters
R. Mertens*
Affiliation:
Institute of Hygiene and Epidemiology, Hospital Hygiene Program Medical Informatics Department, J. Wytsmanstraat, 14 Hazenakkerstraat 20, 1150 Brussels, 9520 Zonnegem, Belgium
W. Ceusters
Affiliation:
Office, Line Engineering NV, Hospital Hygiene Program Medical Informatics Department, J. Wytsmanstraat, 14 Hazenakkerstraat 20, 1150 Brussels, 9520 Zonnegem, Belgium
*
Hospital Hygiene Program Medical Informatics Department, J. Wytsmanstraat, 14 Hazenakkerstraat 20, 1150 Brussels, 9520 Zonnegem, Belgium
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The measurement of quality is a key feature in any quality assurance (QA) program, and the appropriate way to measure quality is by using epidemiological methods. Moreover, in the field of hospital hygiene, epidemiological surveillance has proven to have a powerful preventive impact by itself. Surveillance has been defined as the routine collection of data utilizing a systematic method and standard definitions with the aim of giving feedback in the form of tables, charts, and summary statements.6 The establishment of clear definitions and the collection of accurate data are essential prerequisites. The merits of a surveillance system, as well as its credibility when its results are used for the improvement of the quality delivered by individual caregivers or institutions, not only depend on the quality of the data, but also largely on the system's ability to do justice to the wide variability in the intrinsic and extraneous risk status of the exposed populations. Whenever comparisons are made, be it with one's own performance in previous periods or with other colleagues or external standards, the minimum requirement is that proper adjustment or at least stratification be performed by the principal risk factors. As a consequence, in many instances it is insufficient to collect data on the complications specifically addressed by the quality program, but also on a series of relevant risk factors. Likewise, these data are often not only to be collected for the cases with the adverse outcome, but also for the rest of the denominator population that is exposed to the risk, unless other sources exist from whence these data can be obtained. These requirements certainly put a burden on any surveillance activity for quality assurance and, as such, for the prevention of nosocomial infections.

Type
Statistics for Hospital Epidemiology
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 15 , Issue 3 , March 1994 , pp. 203 - 211
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 1994

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. Wenzel, RI? Quality assessment. An emerging component of hospital epidemiology. Diag Microbiol Infect Dis 1990;13:197–204.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2. Crede, W, Hierholzer, WJ. Linking hospital epidemiology and quality assurance: seasoned concepts in a new role. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1988;9:42–44.Google Scholar
3. Donabedian, A. Contribution of epidemiology to quality assessment and monitoring. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1990;11:117–121.Google Scholar
4. Condon, RE, Haley, RW, Lee, JT, Meakins, JL. Does infection control control infection? Arch Surg 1988;123:250–256.Google Scholar
5. Halev, RW. Culver, DH, White, JW, et al. The efficacy of infection surveillance and control programs in preventing nosocomial infections in US hospitals. Am J Epidemiol 1985:121:182–205.Google Scholar
6. Wenzel, RP, Surveillance and reporting of hospital acquired infections. In: Wenzel, RP, Handbook of Hospital Acquired Infections. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press Inc; 1982.Google Scholar
7. Hierholzer, WJ. Health care data, the epidemiologist's sand: comments on the quantity and quality of data. Am J Med 1991;91(suppl 3B):21S–26S.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8. Wenzel, RP, Pfaller, MA. Infection control: the premier quality assessment program in the United States hospitals. Am J Med 1991;91(suppl 3B):27S–30S.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9. French, GL. The use of personal computers in hospital infection control. J Hosp Infect 1991;IS(suppl A):402–410.Google Scholar
10. LaHaise, S. A comparison of infection control software for use by hospital epidemiologists in meeting the new JCAHO standards. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1990; 11:185–190.Google Scholar
11. Gaynes, R, Friedman, C, Copeland, TA, Thiele, GH. Methodology to evaluate a computer-based system for surveillance of hospital-acquired infections. Am J Infect Control 1990;18:40–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12. Kjaeldgaard, R Cordte, T, Sejberg, D, et al. The DANOP-DATA system: a low-cost personal computer based program for moni-taring of wound infections in surgical ward. J Hosp Infect 1989;13:273–279.Google Scholar
13. Mertens, R, The WHOCARE Software Development Group. The WHOCARE software. Combining local surveillance and multi-center monitoring of quality of care. Poster presented at the 2nd International Conference of the HIS, London, 1990.Google Scholar
14. Evans, RS. Larsen, RA. Burke, JP, et al. Computer surveillance of hospital-acquired infections and antibiotic use. JAMA 1986;256:1007–1011.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15. Gransden, WR. Information, computers and infection control. J Hosp Infect 1990;15:1–5.Google Scholar
16. Kelsey, MC. Intelligent systems: how can they help?] Hosp Infect 1991;18(supplA):418–423.Google Scholar
17. Wong, HKT Micro and macro statistical/scientific database management. In: Proceedings of the First IEEE International Conference on Data Engineering, 1984, Los Angeles, California.Google Scholar
18. Gerson, SL, Talbot, GH, Lusk, E, Hurwitz, S, Strom, BL, Cassileth, PA. Invasive pulmonary aspergillosis in adult acute leukemia: clinical clues to its diagnosis. J Clin Oncol 1985;3:1109–1116.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19. Haley, RW. Surveillance by objective : a new priority-directed approach to the control of nosocomial infections. Am J Infect Control 1985;13:78–89.Google Scholar
20. Birnbaum, D. Nosocomial infection surveillance programs. Infect Control 1987;8:474–479.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
21. Wingert, F, Automated indexing based on SNOMED. Meth Inform Med 1985;24:27–34.Google Scholar
22. Vries, KJ, Marshalsk, B, D'Abarno, JC, Yount, RJ, Dunner, LL. An automated indexing system utilizing semantic net expansion. Computers and Biomedical Research 1992;25:153–167.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23. Cimino, JJ, Barnett, O. Automated translation between medical terminologies using semantic definitions. MD Computing 1990;7:104–109.Google Scholar
24. Masarie, FE, Miller, RA, Bouhaddou, O, Guise, NB, Warner, HR. An interlingua for electronic interchange of medical information: using frames to map between clinical vocabularies. Comput Bio med Res 1991;24:379–400.Google Scholar
25. Walters, RF, Zhang, C. Support of multilingual medical research. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine 1991;3:131–138.Google Scholar
26. Croft, W. Automatic indexing. In: Proceedings of the American Society of Indexers. New York, NY: American Society of Indexers, 1988:85–100.Google Scholar
27. Wagner, MM, Cooper, GE Evaluation of a meta-1-based automatic indexing method for medical documents. Comp Biomed Res 1992;25:351–365.Google Scholar
28. Baud, RH, Rassinoux, AM, Scherrer, JR. Natural language processing and semantical representation of medical texts. Metk Inform Med 1992;31:117–125.Google Scholar
29. Dujols, P, Aubas, P, Baylon, C, Grémy, F, Morphosemantic analysis and translation of medical compound terms. Meth Inform Med 1991;30:30–35.Google ScholarPubMed
30. Sowa, JE Conceptual Structures: Information Processing in Mind and Machine. New York, NY: Addison-Wesley; 1984.Google Scholar
31. Sager, N. General discussion and preliminary conclusion on work sessions I and II. In: Scherrer, JR, Coté, RA, Mandil, SH, eds. Computerized Natural Medical Language Processing for Knowledge Representation. Amsterdam: North-Holland; 1988.Google Scholar
32. Ceusters, W. ANTHEM: advanced natural language interface for multilingual text generation in healthcare. Technical annex to project LRE-067 of the Commission of the European Communities. Unpublished internal document.Google Scholar
33. Cristea, D. Mihaescu, T. Combinila menus with natural language processing in recording medical data. Journal of Clinical Computing 1988;16:156–166.Google Scholar
34. Wiederhold, G. Databases in healthcare. Stanford University. Computer Science Department, 1980; Report no STAN-CS80-790. Unpublished internal document.Google Scholar
35. Classen, DC, Burke, JP, Pestotnik, SL. Evans, KS, Stevens, LE. Surveillance for quality assessment: IV Surveillance using a hospital information system. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1991;12:239–244.Google Scholar
36. Burke, JP, Classen, DC, Pestotnik, SL, Evans, RS, Stevens, LE. The HELP system and its application to infection control. J Hosp Infect 1991;18(suppl A):424–431.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
37. Wenzel, RP, Streed, SA. Surveillance and use of computers in hospital infection control. J Hosp Infect 1989;13:217–229.Google Scholar
38. Buekens, F, Ceusters, W, de Moor, G. The explanatory role of events in causal and temporal reasoning in medicine. Methods Infect Med 1993;32:274–278.Google Scholar
39. Ceusters, W, Buekens, F, Towards a high level framework model for the description of temporal models in healthcare information systems. In: Ten Hoopen, AI, Hofdijk, WJ,. Beckers, WPA. eds. Ontwikkelingen in de medisene informatica. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Publicon Publishing, 1992:41–50.Google Scholar
40. Haley, RW, Shachtman, RH. The emergence of infection surveillance and control programs in U.S. hospitals: an assessment, 1976. Am J Epidemiol 1980;111:574–591.Google Scholar
41. Gaunt, PN. Information in infection control. J Hosp Infect 1991;18(suppl A):397–401.Google Scholar
42. Centre Européen de Normalisation, Technical Committee 251. Directory of the European Standardisation Requirements for Health Care Informatics and Programme for the Development of Standards. Version 1.7. Ghent. Belgium: Centre Européen de Normalisation, Technical Committee 251; 1993.Google Scholar