OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence rate of nosocomial infections in different parts of Germany. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study involved 14,966 patients (45.9% medical, 35.9% surgical, 14.7% obstetrical/gynaecological and 3.5% intensive care) in 72 randomly chosen German hospitals (59 in the old [i.e. previously West German] and 13 in the new [i.e. East German] Federal Lands). Using the CDC criteria for the diagnosis of nosocomial infections specially trained doctors determined whether the infection was in fact nosocomial. RESULTS: There was a 3.5% prevalence rate of nosocomial infections in the entire population (95% confidence interval 3.1-3.9%). In view of the chosen methods and the in part incorrect indication of microbiological diagnosis in the included hospital, this rate of nosocomial infection is likely to be a minimum number. The prevalence rate for the most important nosocomial infections was lower in the new Lands of Federal Germany than the older ones (total prevalence of 2.7 vs 3.6%). The difference is mainly due to the less frequent employment of various devices (e.g. peripheral vascular catheters), rather than different hygienic standards in their use. CONCLUSION: The lower prevalence rate of nosocomial infections in the new Lands, because fewer devices are employed, underlines the need constantly to test the indications for their use.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence rate of nosocomial infections in different parts of Germany. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study involved 14,966 patients (45.9% medical, 35.9% surgical, 14.7% obstetrical/gynaecological and 3.5% intensive care) in 72 randomly chosen German hospitals (59 in the old [i.e. previously West German] and 13 in the new [i.e. East German] Federal Lands). Using the CDC criteria for the diagnosis of nosocomial infections specially trained doctors determined whether the infection was in fact nosocomial. RESULTS: There was a 3.5% prevalence rate of nosocomial infections in the entire population (95% confidence interval 3.1-3.9%). In view of the chosen methods and the in part incorrect indication of microbiological diagnosis in the included hospital, this rate of nosocomial infection is likely to be a minimum number. The prevalence rate for the most important nosocomial infections was lower in the new Lands of Federal Germany than the older ones (total prevalence of 2.7 vs 3.6%). The difference is mainly due to the less frequent employment of various devices (e.g. peripheral vascular catheters), rather than different hygienic standards in their use. CONCLUSION: The lower prevalence rate of nosocomial infections in the new Lands, because fewer devices are employed, underlines the need constantly to test the indications for their use.
Authors: Michael Behnke; Seven Johannes Aghdassi; Sonja Hansen; Luis Alberto Peňa Diaz; Petra Gastmeier; Brar Piening Journal: Dtsch Arztebl Int Date: 2017-12-15 Impact factor: 5.594
Authors: Michael Behnke; Sonja Hansen; Rasmus Leistner; Luis Alberto Peña Diaz; Alexander Gropmann; Dorit Sohr; Petra Gastmeier; Brar Piening Journal: Dtsch Arztebl Int Date: 2013-09-20 Impact factor: 5.594