ArticleGMS hygiene and infection control2025
Evaluation of the implementation of infection control policies in health facilities in the Popokabaka health district in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
Article in GMS hygiene and infection control, 2025. 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.
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Healthcare quality in health facilities relies on the implementation of and providers' adherence to an effective infection control program. The aim of this study was to assess the implementation level of infection prevention and control (IPC) guidelines in healthcare facilities in a low-income country. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study conducted in 18 healthcare facilities of the Popokabaka health district in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Data were collected and analyzed following the IPC assessment framework developed by the World Health Organization (WHO). The framework consisted of eight different sections, of which each is scored up to 100. The level of implementation in each facility was assessed based on a scoring system: inadequate (0-200), basic (201-400), intermediate (401-600), and advanced (601-800). Results: The median score of all facilities was 181.3, IQR 145.0-228.1, with a range from inadequate to basic. Ten (55.6%) healthcare facilities had an inadequate IPC implementation level, while eight (44.4%) had a basic level. IPC education and training were the components that were the most poorly implemented in the surveyed facilities. None of these facilities had multimodal strategies to implement IPC interventions. Conclusion: The level of IPC guideline implementation in healthcare facilities of the Popokabaka health district remains basic as a result of low resource investment in the IPC program. It negatively impacts the quality of care and exposes patients and healthcare providers to healthcare-associated infections.
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.