ArticleAmerican journal of infection control2013
Perceived strength of evidence supporting practices to prevent health care-associated infection: results from a national survey of infection prevention personnel.
Article in American journal of infection control, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- The need to expand the infection prevention workforce in home infusion therapy.American journal of infection control · 2023Article
- Preventing healthcare-associated infection in Switzerland: Results of a national survey.Infection control and hospital epidemiology · 2020Article
- Teaching health care workers to adopt a systems perspective for improved control and prevention of health care-associated infections.American journal of infection control · 2016Article
- Infection control knowledge, beliefs and behaviours amongst cystic fibrosis patients with epidemic Pseudomonas aeruginosa.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2015Article
- Evaluating implementation of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) prevention guidelines in spinal cord injury centers using the PARIHS framework: a mixed methods study.Implementation science : IS · 2015Article
- Diagnosis, management, and prevention of catheter-associated urinary tract infections.Infectious disease clinics of North America · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLimited data exist describing the perceived strength of evidence behind practices to prevent common health care-associated infections (HAIs). We conducted a national survey of infection prevention personnel to assess perception of the evidence for various preventive practices. We were also curious whether lead infection preventionist certification in infection prevention and control (CIC) correlated with perceptions of the evidence.
methodsIn 2009, we mailed surveys to 703 infection prevention personnel using a national random sample of US hospitals and all Veterans Affairs hospitals; the response rate was 68%. The survey asked the respondent to grade the strength of evidence behind prevention practices. We considered "strong" evidence as being 4 and 5 on a Likert scale. Multivariable logistic regression models assessed associations between CIC status and the perceived strength of the evidence.
resultsThe following practices were perceived by 90% or more of respondents as having strong evidence: alcohol-based hand rub, aseptic urinary catheter insertion, chlorhexidine for antisepsis prior to central venous catheter insertion, maximum sterile barriers during central venous catheter insertion, avoiding the femoral site for central venous catheter insertion, and semirecumbent positioning of the ventilated patient. CIC status was significantly associated with the perception of the evidence for several practices.
conclusionSuccessful implementation of evidence-based practices should consider how key individuals in the translational process assess the strength of that evidence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.