Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35483731›Full record

ArticleBMJ open quality2022

How to improve hospital admission screening for patients at risk of multidrug-resistant organism carriage: a before-and-after interventional study and cost-effectiveness analysis.

Dominique Joubert, Stephane Cullati, Pascal Briot, Lorenzo Righi, Damien Grauser, Aimad Ourahmoune, Pierre Chopard

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open quality, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Host-Bacterium Interaction Mechanisms inInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Metabolites · 2025
    Review
  4. Review
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.

Dominique JoubertNursing Department, Quality of care, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland dominique.joubert@hcuge.ch.ORCID 0000-0001-5530-101X
Stephane CullatiQuality of Care Service, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Pascal BriotQuality of Care Service, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Lorenzo RighiQuality of Care Service, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Damien GrauserIT System Department, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Aimad OurahmouneQuality of Care Service, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Pierre ChopardQuality of Care Service, University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInfection prevention and control (IPC) is a prioritised task for healthcare workers in emergency department (ED). Here, we examined compliance with admission screening (AS) and additional precautions (AP) measures for patients at risk of infection with multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) by using a two-stage, multifaceted educational intervention, also comparing the cost of a developed automated indicator for AS and AP compliance and clinical audits to sustain observed findings.

methodsIn the first stage, staff in the ED of the University Hospitals of Geneva, Switzerland, were briefed on IPC measures (AS and AP). A cross-sectional survey was then conducted to assess barriers to IPC measures. In the second stage, healthcare workers underwent training sessions, and an electronic patient record 'order-set' including AS and AP compliance indicators was designed. We compared the cost-benefit of the audits and the automated indicators for AS and AP compliance.

resultsCompliance significantly improved after training, from 36.2% (95% CI 23.6% to 48.8%) to 78.8% (95% CI 67.1% to 90.3%) for AS (n=100, p=0.0050) and from 50.2% (95% CI 45.3% to 55.1%) to 68.5% (95% CI 60.1% to 76.9%) for AP (n=125, p=0.0092). Healthcare workers recognised MDRO screening as an ED task (70.2%), with greater acknowledgment of risk factors at AS considered an ED duty. The monthly cost was higher for clinical audits than the automated indicator, with a reported yearly cost of US$120 203. The initial cost of developing the automated indicator was US$18 290 and its return on investment US$3.44 per US$1 invested.

conclusionTraining ED staff increased compliance with IPC measures when accompanied by team discussions for optimal effectiveness. An automated indicator of compliance is cheaper and closer to real-time than a clinical audit.

Indexed as

Cross InfectionDrug Resistance, Multiple, BacterialCost-Benefit AnalysisCross-Sectional StudiesHospitals, UniversityHumansCost-effectivenessEducationInfection controlQuality improvementQuality measurement

Identifiers

PMID35483731
PMCPMC9052048

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.