Aquino M, Raboud J M, McGeer A, Green K, Chow R, Dimoulas P, Loeb M, Scales D
Department of Microbiology, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2006 Jul;27(7):722-8. doi: 10.1086/504355. Epub 2006 Jun 19.
To determine the validity of using healthcare worker (HCW) recall of patient interactions and medical record review for contact tracing in a critical care setting.
Trained observers recorded the interactions of nurses, respiratory therapists, and service assistants with study patients in a medical-surgical intensive care unit. These observers' records were used as the reference standard to test the criterion validity of using HCW recall data or medical record review data to identify exposure characteristics. We assessed the effects of previous quarantine of the HCW (because of possible exposure) and the availability of patients' medical records for use as memory aids on the accuracy of HCW recall.
A 10-bed medical-surgical intensive care unit at Mount Sinai Hospital in Toronto, Ontario.
Thirty-six HCWs observed caring for 16 patients, for a total of 55 healthcare worker shifts.
Recall accuracy was better among HCWs who were provided with patient medical records as memory aids (P<.01). However, HCWs tended to overestimate exposures when they used patient medical records as memory aids. For 6 of 26 procedures or care activities, this tendency to overestimate was statistically significant (P<.05). Most HCWs with true exposures were identified by means of this technique, despite the overestimations. Documentation of the activities of the 4 service assistants could not be found in any of the patients' medical records. Similarly, the interactions between 6 (19%) of 32 other patient-HCW pairs were not recorded in patients' medical records.
Data collected from follow-up interviews with HCWs in which they are provided with patient medical records as memory aids should be adequate for contact tracing and for determining exposure histories. Neither follow-up interviews nor medical record review alone provide sufficient data for these purposes.
确定在重症监护环境中,利用医护人员对患者互动的回忆以及病历审查进行接触者追踪的有效性。
经过培训的观察员记录了护士、呼吸治疗师和服务助理在一所内科-外科重症监护病房与研究患者的互动情况。这些观察员的记录被用作参考标准,以检验利用医护人员回忆数据或病历审查数据来识别接触特征的标准效度。我们评估了医护人员先前的隔离情况(由于可能接触)以及患者病历作为记忆辅助工具的可用性对医护人员回忆准确性的影响。
安大略省多伦多市西奈山医院的一个拥有10张床位的内科-外科重症监护病房。
观察到36名医护人员护理16名患者,共进行了55个医护人员班次的护理。
将患者病历作为记忆辅助工具的医护人员的回忆准确性更高(P<0.01)。然而,当医护人员将患者病历作为记忆辅助工具时,他们往往会高估接触情况。在26项操作或护理活动中的6项中,这种高估的倾向具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。尽管存在高估情况,但通过这种技术识别出了大多数有真实接触的医护人员。在任何患者的病历中都找不到4名服务助理活动的记录。同样,32对其他患者与医护人员配对中的6对(19%)的互动未记录在患者病历中。
从对医护人员的随访访谈中收集的数据(其中将患者病历作为记忆辅助工具)应足以进行接触者追踪和确定接触史。单独的随访访谈或病历审查都不能为这些目的提供足够的数据。