感染预防与控制响应和升级框架--大流行后的评估和应用。

IF 3.8 3区 医学 Q2 INFECTIOUS DISEASES American journal of infection control Pub Date : 2024-11-07 DOI:10.1016/j.ajic.2024.10.036
Kathy Dempsey, Susan Jain, Patricia Bradd, Kate Clezy, David Greenfield
{"title":"感染预防与控制响应和升级框架--大流行后的评估和应用。","authors":"Kathy Dempsey, Susan Jain, Patricia Bradd, Kate Clezy, David Greenfield","doi":"10.1016/j.ajic.2024.10.036","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The COVID-19 pandemic brought rapid and frequent changes to Infection Prevention and Control (IPAC) recommendations making it difficult for clinicians to stay informed of the most recent requirements and guidelines. The COVID-19 IPAC Response and Escalation Framework (IPAC Framework) was developed to provide scalable IPAC guidance during the pandemic to healthcare in New South Wales, Australia. The use of such frameworks during or outside of a pandemic has rarely been reported and evaluated here.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using a thematic analysis approach, a qualitative study using an online, cross-sectional survey comprising 27 questions was sent to 248 key stakeholders. Participants were health workers with broad clinical and system representation with responsibilities for risk assessment, communicating, implementing and/or monitoring the IPAC Framework.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The IPAC Framework provided a useful IPAC tool for the management of COVID-19 as perceived by 93% of respondents. The overwhelming majority (91%) reported the Framework provided enough information on IPAC strategies needed for COVID-19 that were aligned with transmission risk. Resources supporting the IPAC Framework were reported by most respondents (84%) as being widely accepted as the authoritative guidance.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>An IPAC response and escalation framework is perceived as highly useful by clinicians and administrators to manage IPAC requirements in health care during a pandemic. The IPAC Framework can be applied more generally to support ongoing IPAC requirements.</p>","PeriodicalId":7621,"journal":{"name":"American journal of infection control","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Infection Prevention and Control Response and Escalation Framework - evaluation and application beyond a pandemic.\",\"authors\":\"Kathy Dempsey, Susan Jain, Patricia Bradd, Kate Clezy, David Greenfield\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ajic.2024.10.036\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The COVID-19 pandemic brought rapid and frequent changes to Infection Prevention and Control (IPAC) recommendations making it difficult for clinicians to stay informed of the most recent requirements and guidelines. The COVID-19 IPAC Response and Escalation Framework (IPAC Framework) was developed to provide scalable IPAC guidance during the pandemic to healthcare in New South Wales, Australia. The use of such frameworks during or outside of a pandemic has rarely been reported and evaluated here.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using a thematic analysis approach, a qualitative study using an online, cross-sectional survey comprising 27 questions was sent to 248 key stakeholders. Participants were health workers with broad clinical and system representation with responsibilities for risk assessment, communicating, implementing and/or monitoring the IPAC Framework.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The IPAC Framework provided a useful IPAC tool for the management of COVID-19 as perceived by 93% of respondents. The overwhelming majority (91%) reported the Framework provided enough information on IPAC strategies needed for COVID-19 that were aligned with transmission risk. Resources supporting the IPAC Framework were reported by most respondents (84%) as being widely accepted as the authoritative guidance.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>An IPAC response and escalation framework is perceived as highly useful by clinicians and administrators to manage IPAC requirements in health care during a pandemic. The IPAC Framework can be applied more generally to support ongoing IPAC requirements.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7621,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American journal of infection control\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American journal of infection control\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2024.10.036\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of infection control","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2024.10.036","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:COVID-19 大流行使感染预防与控制 (IPAC) 建议发生了快速而频繁的变化,临床医生很难及时了解最新的要求和指南。COVID-19 IPAC 响应和升级框架(IPAC 框架)的制定是为了在大流行期间为澳大利亚新南威尔士州的医疗保健机构提供可扩展的 IPAC 指导。此类框架在大流行期间或非大流行期间的使用情况很少有报道和评估:采用专题分析方法,向 248 名主要利益相关者发送了一份包含 27 个问题的在线横截面调查问卷,进行了一项定性研究。参与调查的人员都是卫生工作者,他们在临床和系统中具有广泛的代表性,负责风险评估、沟通、实施和/或监控 IPAC 框架:93%的受访者认为 IPAC 框架为 COVID-19 的管理提供了有用的 IPAC 工具。绝大多数受访者(91%)表示,该框架提供了有关 COVID-19 所需的 IPAC 战略的足够信息,这些战略与传播风险相一致。大多数受访者(84%)表示,支持 IPAC 框架的资源被广泛接受为权威指南:结论:临床医生和管理人员认为 IPAC 响应和升级框架在大流行期间管理医疗保健中的 IPAC 要求方面非常有用。IPAC 框架可以更广泛地应用于支持持续的 IPAC 要求。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Infection Prevention and Control Response and Escalation Framework - evaluation and application beyond a pandemic.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic brought rapid and frequent changes to Infection Prevention and Control (IPAC) recommendations making it difficult for clinicians to stay informed of the most recent requirements and guidelines. The COVID-19 IPAC Response and Escalation Framework (IPAC Framework) was developed to provide scalable IPAC guidance during the pandemic to healthcare in New South Wales, Australia. The use of such frameworks during or outside of a pandemic has rarely been reported and evaluated here.

Methods: Using a thematic analysis approach, a qualitative study using an online, cross-sectional survey comprising 27 questions was sent to 248 key stakeholders. Participants were health workers with broad clinical and system representation with responsibilities for risk assessment, communicating, implementing and/or monitoring the IPAC Framework.

Results: The IPAC Framework provided a useful IPAC tool for the management of COVID-19 as perceived by 93% of respondents. The overwhelming majority (91%) reported the Framework provided enough information on IPAC strategies needed for COVID-19 that were aligned with transmission risk. Resources supporting the IPAC Framework were reported by most respondents (84%) as being widely accepted as the authoritative guidance.

Conclusion: An IPAC response and escalation framework is perceived as highly useful by clinicians and administrators to manage IPAC requirements in health care during a pandemic. The IPAC Framework can be applied more generally to support ongoing IPAC requirements.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
4.10%
发文量
479
审稿时长
24 days
期刊介绍: AJIC covers key topics and issues in infection control and epidemiology. Infection control professionals, including physicians, nurses, and epidemiologists, rely on AJIC for peer-reviewed articles covering clinical topics as well as original research. As the official publication of the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology (APIC)
期刊最新文献
Letter to the editor on National trends and disparities in herpes zoster vaccination among US older adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), 2008 to 2022. Response to the letter to the editor on "National trends and disparities in herpes zoster vaccination among US older adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 2008 to 2022". Response to the letter to the editor regarding "The efficacy of an alcohol-based nasal antiseptic versus mupirocin or an iodophor for preventing SSIs using a meta-analysis". Clinical impact of active screening cultures for carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii: A systematic review and meta-analysis. A survey of infection prevention and animal-assisted activity policies in health care facilities-United States, 2023.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1