...
首页> 外文期刊>The Journal of hospital infection >Inter-hospital comparison of rates of surgical site infection following caesarean section delivery: Evaluation of a multicentre surveillance study
【24h】

Inter-hospital comparison of rates of surgical site infection following caesarean section delivery: Evaluation of a multicentre surveillance study

机译:剖宫产后手术部位感染率的院内比较:一项多中心监测研究的评估

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Background: Short postoperative stays following caesarean section delivery make it difficult to assess accurately the risk of surgical site infection (SSI). Methods of case-finding that minimize variation are required to support effective surveillance systems, especially where used for benchmarking. Aim: To evaluate the efficacy of case-finding methods for SSI following caesarean delivery and their utility in establishing benchmark rates of SSI. Methods: Hospitals conducted surveillance over one or two 13-week periods. Patients were reviewed during their inpatient stay, post partum by community midwives and via patient questionnaire at 30 days post delivery. To estimate the reliability of case-finding methods, case-note reviews were undertaken in a random sample of four hospitals. Findings: A total of 404 SSIs were detected in 4107 caesarean deliveries from 14 hospitals. The median time to SSI was 10 days, 66% were detected in-hospital or by community midwives, and an additional 34% were patient-reported. The rate of SSI was 9.8% but the proportion of patients followed up varied significantly between centres. The estimated sensitivity and specificity of case-finding was 91.4% [95% confidence interval (CI): 53.4-98.4] and 98.6% (95% CI: 98.4-98.8), the positive predictive value 91.0% (95% CI: 82.4-96.1) and negative predictive value 98.6% (95% CI: 93.9-99.5). Conclusions: Combined case ascertainment methods are a feasible way to achieve active post-discharge surveillance and had high negative and positive predictive values. Additional SSIs can be detected by patient questionnaires but rates of SSI were strongly influenced by variation in intensity of both healthcare worker- and patient-based case-finding. This factor must be taken into account when comparing or benchmarking rates of SSI.
机译:背景:剖宫产术后术后短暂停留使得难以准确评估手术部位感染(SSI)的风险。需要使用使差异最小化的案例发现方法来支持有效的监视系统,尤其是在用于基准测试的情况下。目的:评估剖宫产后SSI病例发现方法的功效及其在确定SSI基准率中的效用。方法:医院在一个或两个13周的时间内进行了监视。在住院期间,产后助产士和分娩后30天通过患者问卷对患者进行了检查。为了评估案例发现方法的可靠性,在四家医院的随机样本中进行了案例注释审查。结果:在14家医院的4107例剖腹产中共检测到404个SSI。 SSI的中位时间为10天,医院内或社区助产士检测到66%,患者报告的发生率为34%。 SSI的发生率为9.8%,但各中心之间随访的患者比例差异很大。发现病例的敏感性和特异性估计为91.4%[95%置信区间(CI):53.4-98.4]和98.6%(95%CI:98.4-98.8),阳性预测值为91.0%(95%CI:82.4) -96.1)和阴性预测值98.6%(95%CI:93.9-99.5)。结论:结合病例确定方法是实现主动出院后监测的可行方法,具有较高的阴性和阳性预测值。其他SSI可以通过患者问卷进行检测,但是SSI的比率受医护人员和基于患者的病例发现强度的变化强烈影响。在比较或基准化SSI的比率时,必须考虑该因素。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号