Gase Kathleen A, Babcock Hilary M
BJC HealthCare, St. Louis, MO.
Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO.
Am J Infect Control. 2015 Feb;43(2):165-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2014.10.013. Epub 2014 Dec 3.
There is still little known about how infection prevention (IP) staffing affects patient outcomes across the country. Current evaluations mainly focus on the ratio of IP resources to acute care beds (ACBs) and have not strongly correlated with patient outcomes. The scope of IP and the role of the infection preventionist in health care have expanded and changed dramatically since the Study on the Efficacy of Nosocomial Infection Control (SENIC Project) recommended a 1 IP resource to 250 ACB ration in the 1980s. Without a universally accepted model for accounting for additional IP responsibilities, it is difficult to truly assess IP staffing needs. A previously suggested alternative staffing model was applied to acute care hospitals in our organization to determine its utility.
关于全国范围内感染预防（IP）人员配置如何影响患者结局，目前仍知之甚少。当前的评估主要集中在IP资源与急性护理床位（ACB）的比例上，且与患者结局并无紧密关联。自20世纪80年代医院感染控制效果研究（SENIC项目）建议IP资源与ACB的比例为1:250以来，IP的范围以及感染预防专员在医疗保健中的作用已经大幅扩展并发生了巨大变化。由于没有一个普遍接受的模型来核算额外的IP职责，因此很难真正评估IP人员配置需求。我们机构将之前提出的一种替代人员配置模型应用于急性护理医院，以确定其效用。
