S Tomczyk1, S Aghdassi2, J Storr3, S Hansen2, A J Stewardson4, P Bischoff2, P Gastmeier2, B Allegranzi5. 1. Infection Prevention and Control Technical and Clinical Hub, Department of Integrated Health Services, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland; Institute of Global Health, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland. 2. Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Institute of Hygiene and Environmental Medicine, Berlin, Germany; National Reference Centre for Surveillance of Nosocomial Infections, Berlin, Germany. 3. Infection Prevention and Control Technical and Clinical Hub, Department of Integrated Health Services, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland. 4. Department of Infectious Diseases, The Alfred and Central Clinical School, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. 5. Infection Prevention and Control Technical and Clinical Hub, Department of Integrated Health Services, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland; Institute of Global Health, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland. Electronic address: allegranzib@who.int.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Monitoring and evaluation are an essential part of infection prevention and control (IPC) implementation. The authors developed an IPC assessment framework (IPCAF) to support implementation of the World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines on core components of IPC programmes in acute healthcare facilities. AIM: To evaluate the usability and reliability of the IPCAF tool for global use. METHODS: The IPCAF is a questionnaire with a scoring system to measure the level of IPC implementation according to the eight WHO core components. The tool was pre-tested qualitatively, revised and translated selectively. A convenience sample of hospitals was invited to participate in the final testing. At least two IPC professionals from each hospital independently completed the IPCAF and a usability questionnaire online. The tool's internal consistency and interobserver reliability or intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were assessed, and usability questions were summarized descriptively. FINDINGS: In total, 46 countries, 181 hospitals and 324 individuals participated; 52 (16%) and 55 (17%) individual respondents came from low- and lower-middle income countries, respectively. Fifty-two percent of respondents took less than 1 h to complete the IPCAF. Overall, there was adequate internal consistency and a high ICC (0.92, 95% confidence interval 0.89-0.94). Ten individual questions had poor reliability (ICC <0.4); these were considered for revision according to usability feedback and expert opinion. CONCLUSIONS: The WHO IPCAF was tested using a robust global study and revised as necessary. It is now an effective tool for IPC improvement in healthcare facilities.
BACKGROUND: Monitoring and evaluation are an essential part of infection prevention and control (IPC) implementation. The authors developed an IPC assessment framework (IPCAF) to support implementation of the World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines on core components of IPC programmes in acute healthcare facilities. AIM: To evaluate the usability and reliability of the IPCAF tool for global use. METHODS: The IPCAF is a questionnaire with a scoring system to measure the level of IPC implementation according to the eight WHO core components. The tool was pre-tested qualitatively, revised and translated selectively. A convenience sample of hospitals was invited to participate in the final testing. At least two IPC professionals from each hospital independently completed the IPCAF and a usability questionnaire online. The tool's internal consistency and interobserver reliability or intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were assessed, and usability questions were summarized descriptively. FINDINGS: In total, 46 countries, 181 hospitals and 324 individuals participated; 52 (16%) and 55 (17%) individual respondents came from low- and lower-middle income countries, respectively. Fifty-two percent of respondents took less than 1 h to complete the IPCAF. Overall, there was adequate internal consistency and a high ICC (0.92, 95% confidence interval 0.89-0.94). Ten individual questions had poor reliability (ICC <0.4); these were considered for revision according to usability feedback and expert opinion. CONCLUSIONS: The WHO IPCAF was tested using a robust global study and revised as necessary. It is now an effective tool for IPC improvement in healthcare facilities.
Authors: Sara Tomczyk; Anthony Twyman; Marlieke E A de Kraker; Ana Paula Coutinho Rehse; Ermira Tartari; João Paulo Toledo; Alessandro Cassini; Didier Pittet; Benedetta Allegranzi Journal: Lancet Infect Dis Date: 2022-02-21 Impact factor: 71.421
Authors: Marc Sam Opollo; Tom Charles Otim; Walter Kizito; Pruthu Thekkur; Ajay M V Kumar; Freddy Eric Kitutu; Rogers Kisame; Maria Zolfo Journal: Trop Med Infect Dis Date: 2021-05-01