You are not currently logged in.
Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Simplified Surveillance for Nosocomial Bloodstream Infections
Deborah S. Yokoe, Jane Anderson, Robert Chambers, Maureen Connor, Robert Finberg, Cyrus Hopkins, Deborah Lichtenberg, Susan Marino, Dorothy McLaughlin, Edward O'Rourke, Matthew Samore, Kenneth Sands, Judith Strymish, Elise Tamplin, Nancy Vallonde and Richard Platt
Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology
Vol. 19, No. 9 (Sep., 1998), pp. 657-660
Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30141530
Page Count: 4
You can always find the topics here!Topics: Infections, Blood, Microbiology, Bacteremia, Patient surveillance, Surveillance, Hospital administration, Pediatrics, Skin, Mycobacterium tuberculosis
Were these topics helpful?See somethings inaccurate? Let us know!
Select the topics that are inaccurate.
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
Objective: To compare a surveillance definition of nosocomial bloodstream infections requiring only microbiology data to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) current definition. Setting: Six teaching hospitals. Methods: We classified a representative sample of 73 positive blood cultures from six hospitals growing common skin contaminant isolates using a definition for bacteremia requiring only microbiology data and the CDC definition for primary bloodstream infection (National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance [NNIS] System review method). The classifications assigned during routine prospective surveillance also were noted, and the time required to classify isolates by the two methods was compared. Results: Among 65 blood cultures growing common skin contaminant isolates obtained from adults, the agreement rate between the microbiology data method and the NNIS review method was 91%. Agreement was significantly poorer for the eight blood cultures growing common skin contaminant isolates obtained from pediatric patients. The microbiology data method requires approximately 20 minutes less time per isolate than does routine surveillance. Conclusions: A definition based on microbiology data alone yields the same result as the CDC's definition in the large majority of instances. It is more resource-efficient than the CDC's current definition.
Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology © 1998 Cambridge University Press