Literature DB >> 16216657

Handheld computer surveillance: shoe-leather epidemiology in the "palm" of your hand.

Jason E Farley1, Arjun Srinivasan, Ann Richards, Xioayan Song, John McEachen, Trish M Perl.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although urinary tract infections (UTIs) are the most common nosocomial infection, active UTI surveillance is often not feasible for infection control departments.
METHODS: As part of an ongoing urinary catheter evaluation, we investigated the accuracy and cost-effectiveness of using handheld personal digital assistants (PDA) and computer-based UTI surveillance in comparison with traditional surveillance of UTIs among medical intensive care unit (MICU) patients. From September 22, 2000, to October 22, 2000, an infection control practitioner (ICP) actively surveyed all MICU patients who had a urinary catheter to determine criteria for a nosocomial UTI as defined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Research assistants visited the unit each day to determine which patients had urinary catheters, and this information was uploaded to a database designed for laboratory-based UTI surveillance. Patients with a urinary catheter were included if admitted to the MICU for >48 hours and excluded if symptoms developed <48 hours after admission.
RESULTS: Both data collection methods identified 8 UTIs within the 1-month period, with 3 UTIs meeting inclusion criteria. Traditional surveillance required 8 hours weekly, whereas the PDA-computer surveillance required 1-and-a-half hours weekly. Traditional surveillance correctly attributed all 3 UTIs to the MICU. The PDA-computer surveillance incorrectly attributed the location of 2 of the UTIs. In both cases, the UTI occurred less than 48 hours after the patient was transferred from the MICU.
CONCLUSION: Our data demonstrate that PDA surveillance detects nosocomial UTIs efficiently and is a novel, timesaving technique that realizes a cost savings in the first year.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16216657     DOI: 10.1016/j.ajic.2005.07.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Infect Control        ISSN: 0196-6553            Impact factor:   2.918


  2 in total

Review 1.  Economics of infection control surveillance technology: cost-effective or just cost?

Authors:  Jon P Furuno; Marin L Schweizer; Jessina C McGregor; Eli N Perencevich
Journal:  Am J Infect Control       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 2.918

Review 2.  What is the economic evidence for mHealth? A systematic review of economic evaluations of mHealth solutions.

Authors:  Sarah J Iribarren; Kenrick Cato; Louise Falzon; Patricia W Stone
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-02-02       Impact factor: 3.240

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.