L De Bus1, G Diet2, B Gadeyne3, I Leroux-Roels4, G Claeys4, K Steurbaut3, D Benoit2, F De Turck3, J Decruyenaere2, P Depuydt2. 1. Department of Intensive Care, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium. Electronic address: liesbet.debus@ugent.be. 2. Department of Intensive Care, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium. 3. Department of Information Technology, Ghent University - iMinds, Ghent, Belgium. 4. Department of Clinical Chemistry, Microbiology and Immunology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: An electronic decision support programme was developed within the intensive care unit (ICU) that provides an overview of all infection-related patient data, and allows ICU physicians to add clinical information during patient rounds, resulting in prospective compilation of a database. AIM: To assess the validity of computer-assisted surveillance (CAS) of ICU-acquired infection performed by analysis of this database. METHODS: CAS was compared with prospective paper-based surveillance (PBS) for ICU-acquired respiratory tract infection (RTI), bloodstream infection (BSI) and urinary tract infection (UTI) over four months at a 36-bed medical and surgical ICU. An independent panel reviewed the data in the case of discrepancy between CAS and PBS. FINDINGS: PBS identified 89 ICU-acquired infections (13 BSI, 18 UTI, 58 RTI) and CAS identified 90 ICU-acquired infections (14 BSI, 17 UTI, 59 RTI) in 876 ICU admissions. There was agreement between CAS and PBS on 13 BSI (100 %), 14 UTI (77.8 %) and 42 RTI (72.4 %). Overall, there was agreement on 69 infections (77.5%), resulting in a kappa score of 0.74. Discrepancy between PBS and CAS was the result of capture error in 11 and 14 infections, respectively. Interobserver disagreement on probability (13 RTI) and focus (two RTI, one UTI) occurred for 16 episodes. The time required to collect information using CAS is less than 30% of the time required when using PBS. CONCLUSION: CAS for ICU-acquired infection by analysis of a database built through daily workflow is a feasible surveillance method and has good agreement with PBS. Discrepancy between CAS and PBS is largely due to interobserver variability.
BACKGROUND: An electronic decision support programme was developed within the intensive care unit (ICU) that provides an overview of all infection-related patient data, and allows ICU physicians to add clinical information during patient rounds, resulting in prospective compilation of a database. AIM: To assess the validity of computer-assisted surveillance (CAS) of ICU-acquired infection performed by analysis of this database. METHODS:CAS was compared with prospective paper-based surveillance (PBS) for ICU-acquired respiratory tract infection (RTI), bloodstream infection (BSI) and urinary tract infection (UTI) over four months at a 36-bed medical and surgical ICU. An independent panel reviewed the data in the case of discrepancy between CAS and PBS. FINDINGS:PBS identified 89 ICU-acquired infections (13 BSI, 18 UTI, 58 RTI) and CAS identified 90 ICU-acquired infections (14 BSI, 17 UTI, 59 RTI) in 876 ICU admissions. There was agreement between CAS and PBS on 13 BSI (100 %), 14 UTI (77.8 %) and 42 RTI (72.4 %). Overall, there was agreement on 69 infections (77.5%), resulting in a kappa score of 0.74. Discrepancy between PBS and CAS was the result of capture error in 11 and 14 infections, respectively. Interobserver disagreement on probability (13 RTI) and focus (two RTI, one UTI) occurred for 16 episodes. The time required to collect information using CAS is less than 30% of the time required when using PBS. CONCLUSION:CAS for ICU-acquired infection by analysis of a database built through daily workflow is a feasible surveillance method and has good agreement with PBS. Discrepancy between CAS and PBS is largely due to interobserver variability.
Authors: Barbara O M Claus; Kirsten Colpaert; Kristof Steurbaut; Filip De Turck; Dirk P Vogelaers; Hugo Robays; Johan Decruyenaere Journal: Int J Clin Pharm Date: 2015-02-10
Authors: Liesbet De Bus; Wouter Denys; Julie Catteeuw; Bram Gadeyne; Karel Vermeulen; Jerina Boelens; Geert Claeys; Jan J De Waele; Johan Decruyenaere; Pieter O Depuydt Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2016-03-30 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Fleur P Paling; Martin Wolkewitz; Pieter Depuydt; Liesbet de Bus; Frangiscos Sifakis; Marc J M Bonten; Jan A J W Kluytmans Journal: Antimicrob Resist Infect Control Date: 2017-04-20 Impact factor: 4.887
Authors: Liesbet De Bus; Bram Gadeyne; Johan Steen; Jerina Boelens; Geert Claeys; Dominique Benoit; Jan De Waele; Johan Decruyenaere; Pieter Depuydt Journal: Crit Care Date: 2018-09-29 Impact factor: 9.097
Authors: Johan Steen; Stijn Vansteelandt; Liesbet De Bus; Pieter Depuydt; Bram Gadeyne; Dominique D Benoit; Johan Decruyenaere Journal: Ann Am Thorac Soc Date: 2021-05
Authors: Annemieke K van den Broek; Berend H H Beishuizen; Eric A F Haak; Michiel Duyvendak; Jaap Ten Oever; Chris Sytsma; Mieke van Triest; Cornelia C H Wielders; Jan M Prins Journal: Antimicrob Resist Infect Control Date: 2021-07-03 Impact factor: 4.887