ArticleBMJ global health2026
Strengthening infection prevention and control in humanitarian settings: lessons and opportunities from Médecins Sans Frontières (2021-2023).
Article in BMJ global health, 2026. 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEffective infection prevention and control (IPC) is fundamental to patient safety in low-resource settings, yet its implementation remains a challenge. Standardised tools are essential for assessing IPC programmes and guiding improvements. This study evaluates the implementation level of IPC across global Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) supported facilities using the Stepwise Infection Prevention and Control Approach (SIPCA) assessment tool.
methodsA retrospective analysis of 374 SIPCA assessments from 173 MSF-supported facilities was conducted between August 2021 and December 2023. Overall and component-specific IPC scores were analysed and a mixed-effects logistic regression model was used to identify factors associated with higher IPC performance. Changes in scores over time were stratified by initial IPC level.
resultsThe overall median IPC score was 60.4%, corresponding to an 'upper-intermediate' level of implementation. The presence of a formal IPC programme (OR 6.47, p<0.001) and a bed occupancy rate below 90% (OR 2.94, p=0.001) were the strongest predictors of achieving a score above the median IPC threshold. Repeated assessments were associated with significant improvement, particularly for facilities starting at a 'basic' level (median score increase of +21.6%). However, a ceiling effect was observed, with minimal improvement in facilities already at an 'upper-intermediate' level. Key programme weaknesses were identified in healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) surveillance, particularly regarding surgical site infections (40.6%).
conclusionsThe SIPCA tool is effective for monitoring IPC status and guiding IPC interventions in humanitarian contexts. To enhance patient safety, efforts must focus on establishing IPC programmes and addressing systemic pressures, such as high bed occupancy rates. Targeted strategies are necessary to strengthen HAI surveillance and help high-performing facilities overcome performance plateaus, ultimately achieving advanced levels of IPC excellence.
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.