Active surveillance of hospital-acquired infections in South Africa: Implementation, impact and challenges.

BACKGROUND Hospital-acquired infections (HAIs) are a significant although unquantified burden in South Africa. Lack of adequate surveillance compounds this problem. OBJECTIVE To report on the establishment and outcomes of a unit-specific surveillance system for hospital-acquired infections, based on international standards, in a private academic hospital. METHODS Active unit-specific surveillance of device-associated infections (DAIs) was introduced over a 2-year period. The surveillance system was based on the US National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) utilising standardised definitions. Analysis of DAI rates and device utilisation was done according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention methods. Comparative analysis using study-derived annualised data and existing NHSN data was done. RESULTS Surveillance results of DAI rates showed significant reductions in intensive care unit-related ventilator-associated pneumonia (42%) and central line-associated bloodstream infections (100%) over a 3-year period. Substantial variations in DAI rates and utilisation ratios between wards highlight the importance of unit-specific surveillance. CONCLUSIONS Active surveillance requires a significant investment in resources and is a sustained operational challenge, although equally significant benefits are derived from a better understanding of HAIs with more targeted interventions and efficient use of resources. A robust surveillance system is an essential component of any healthcare infection prevention and control programme and is a prerequisite to contextualising the HAI burden of hospitals.

[1]  J. Edwards,et al.  National Healthcare Safety Network report, data summary for 2011, device-associated module. , 2013, American journal of infection control.

[2]  Didier Pittet,et al.  Hospital organisation, management, and structure for prevention of health-care-associated infection: a systematic review and expert consensus. , 2015, The Lancet. Infectious diseases.

[3]  E. Alp,et al.  Evaluation of the effectiveness of an infection control program in adult intensive care units: a report from a middle-income country. , 2014, American journal of infection control.

[4]  Margaret A Dudeck,et al.  National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) report, data summary for 2012, Device-associated module. , 2013, American journal of infection control.

[5]  R. Newcombe,et al.  Prevalence survey of healthcare-associated infections in Argentina; comparison with England, Wales, Northern Ireland and South Africa. , 2012, The Journal of hospital infection.

[6]  B. Allegranzi,et al.  Burden of endemic health-care-associated infection in developing countries: systematic review and meta-analysis , 2011, The Lancet.

[7]  R. Weber,et al.  Stratification of cumulative antibiograms in hospitals for hospital unit, specimen type, isolate sequence and duration of hospital stay. , 2008, The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy.

[8]  Margaret A Dudeck,et al.  CDC/NHSN surveillance definition of health care-associated infection and criteria for specific types of infections in the acute care setting. , 2008, American journal of infection control.

[9]  H. Rüden,et al.  Effectiveness of a nationwide nosocomial infection surveillance system for reducing nosocomial infections. , 2006, The Journal of hospital infection.

[10]  T. L. Gustafson Three Uses of the Standardized Infection Ratio (SIR) in Infection Control , 2006, Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology.

[11]  J. Hughes Study on the efficacy of nosocomial infection control (SENIC Project): results and implications for the future. , 1988, Chemotherapy.