ArticleAnnals of neurosciences2025
A Study of Linking Infection Prevention Control to Hospital Efficiency and Reputation.
Article in Annals of neurosciences, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) processes are associated with inherent changes in the general operations of hospitals as they directly modify the clinical outcomes, effective functioning and the internal image of any healthcare setting. Positive IPC is essential to the safety of patients and reliability of the institution. Insight into the perceptions of IPC practice by the hospital staff is a vital element to enhance practising procedures and optimise practice-related measures. Purpose: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the perception and practicability of the IPC between the members of staff working in the hospital in different clinical and non-clinical departments. In particular, the study aimed at defining the impact of such practices on the efficiency and internal reputability of the hospital. Methods: A questionnaire was designed to be given to the members of staff at the hospital, a research of Linking Infection Prevention Control to Hospital Efficiency and Reputation in several departments, both clinical and non-clinical. The collected data involved staff perceptions about IPC practices, factors that impede proper implementation and infection high-risk areas. The answers were compared in a logical manner to discover a shared theme and possible missing links in the modern IPC strategies. Results: Current IPC measures negatively influenced hospital efficiency and the internal reputation, as established by the analysis. Employees have pointed out the great variance in the practice levels of IPC compliance between the departments, and that intervention in this may be required to complement training with targeted solutions, especially where there is the greatest risk. The research reported that persistency in training and education enhanced compliance as well as awareness among the health workers. Conclusion: Findings support the need to make hospitals focus on high-risk processes and ensure implementation of IPC practices by reinforcing it with specific training sessions. Educational programs have the prospect to significantly increase efficiency and internal image of the hospital because they may influence staff members and their perspective on it. The need to study the most appropriate sample size and the contribution of cutting-edge technologies in enhancing IPC further should also be answered in subsequent research.
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.