ArticleIntegrated healthcare journal2020
Health professional education and practice in preventing and controlling infections in New Zealand: a review to inform strategies for enhancing practitioner competencies and patient safety.
Article in Integrated healthcare journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Quality assurance for reducing infections is a key objective of the WHO's global action plan targeting antimicrobial resistance, yet no studies have employed a multifaceted approach to review health professional education and practice in infection prevention and control (IPC). This study completed such a review. Methods and analysis: New Zealand medical and nursing curricula were analysed for IPC-related teaching and assessment. Clinicians (undergraduate to senior) received peer-expert evaluation while performing procedures demonstrating IPC competencies. Patient and clinician self-evaluation followed. Hospital IPC practice monitoring was also reviewed. Results: Medical curricula had approximately twice the total IPC-related theory compared with nursing (79.71 vs 41.66 hours), emphasising microbiology. IPC theory in nursing curricula was applied, emphasising health and safety. Junior nursing students were rigorously taught (16.17 hours) and assessed (2.91 hours) in practical IPC competencies, whereas little practical instruction (2.62 hours) and no formal assessment existed for junior medical students. IPC teaching chiefly occurred during medical students' senior clinical years, and was opportunistic, rotation-specific or in introductory sessions. Senior medical and nursing students were expected to be IPC-proficient but no formal assessment occurred. Peer review generally revealed satisfactory practice, however both professions had lapses with hand hygiene, asepsis and incorrect donning, removal and use of personal protective equipment. Clinician confidence in providing and being peer-reviewed for best IPC practice, and patients' confidence in receiving best IPC care, was positively associated with clinician experience. Trainee interns, whose confidence in IPC practice was not matched by the same desire for monitoring/feedback as senior colleagues, were the exception. Conclusion: Multifaceted approaches to IPC quality assurance have utility in identifying gaps, reducing infection transmission and reassuring staff and patients.
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.