Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23421909›Full record

Trial reportImplementation science : IS2013

Implementation of infection control best practice in intensive care units throughout Europe: a mixed-method evaluation study.

Hugo Sax, Lauren Clack, Sylvie Touveneau, Fabricio da Liberdade Jantarada, Didier Pittet, Walter Zingg, PROHIBIT study group

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Implementation science : IS, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
6.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Implementing strategies to prevent infections in acute-care settings.Infection control and hospital epidemiology · 2023
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2021
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Hugo SaxInfection Control Programme, University of Geneva Hospitals and Medical Faculty, World Health Organization Collaborating Centre on Patient Safety, Geneva, Switzerland. Hugo.Sax@usz.ch
Lauren Clack
Sylvie Touveneau
Fabricio da Liberdade Jantarada
Didier Pittet
Walter Zingg
PROHIBIT study group
University of Geneva · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe implementation of evidence-based infection control practices is essential, yet challenging for healthcare institutions worldwide. Although acknowledged that implementation success varies with contextual factors, little is known regarding the most critical specific conditions within the complex cultural milieu of varying economic, political, and healthcare systems. Given the increasing reliance on unified global schemes to improve patient safety and healthcare effectiveness, research on this topic is needed and timely. The 'InDepth' work package of the European FP7 Prevention of Hospital Infections by Intervention and Training (PROHIBIT) consortium aims to assess barriers and facilitators to the successful implementation of catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) prevention in intensive care units (ICU) across several European countries.

methodsWe use a qualitative case study approach in the ICUs of six purposefully selected acute care hospitals among the 15 participants in the PROHIBIT CRBSI intervention study. For sensitizing schemes we apply the theory of diffusion of innovation, published implementation frameworks, sensemaking, and new institutionalism. We conduct interviews with hospital health providers/agents at different organizational levels and ethnographic observations, and conduct rich artifact collection, and photography during two rounds of on-site visits, once before and once one year into the intervention. Data analysis is based on grounded theory. Given the challenge of different languages and cultures, we enlist the help of local interpreters, allot two days for site visits, and perform triangulation across multiple data sources. Qualitative measures of implementation success will consider the longitudinal interaction between the initiative and the institutional context. Quantitative outcomes on catheter-related bloodstream infections and performance indicators from another work package of the consortium will produce a final mixed-methods report.

conclusionA mixed-methods study of this scale with longitudinal follow-up is unique in the field of infection control. It highlights the 'Why' and 'How' of best practice implementation, revealing key factors that determine success of a uniform intervention in the context of several varying cultural, economic, political, and medical systems across Europe. These new insights will guide future implementation of more tailored and hence more successful infection control programs.

Indexed as

Catheter-Related InfectionsCritical CareCross InfectionData CollectionDiffusion of InnovationEuropeEvaluation Studies as TopicEvidence-Based PracticeHand HygieneHealth PersonnelHumansInfection ControlInservice TrainingIntensive Care UnitsLongitudinal StudiesOrganizational Innovation

Identifiers

PMID23421909
PMCPMC3584730
OpenAlexW2115734050

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.