1Infection Control Programme and WHO Collaborating Center, University of Geneva Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, 4 Rue Gabrielle Perret-Gentil, 1211, 14 Geneva, Switzerland.
2Infection Prevention and Control Global Unit, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2019 May 28;8:87. doi: 10.1186/s13756-019-0527-1. eCollection 2019.
Around 5-15% of all hospital patients worldwide suffer from healthcare-associated infections (HAIs), and years of excessive antimicrobial use in human and animal medicine have created emerging antimicrobial resistance (AMR). A considerable amount of evidence-based measures have been published to address these challenges, but the largest challenge seems to be their implementation.
In June 2017, a total of 42 experts convened at the Geneva IPC-Think Tank to discuss four domains in implementation science: 1) teaching implementation skills; 2) fostering implementation of IPC and antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) by policy making; 3) national/international actions to foster implementation skills; and 4) translational research bridging social sciences and clinical research in infection prevention and control (IPC) and AMR.
Although neglected in the past, implementation skills have become a priority in IPC and AMS. They should now be part of any curriculum in health care, and IPC career paths should be created. Guidelines and policies should be aligned with each other and evidence-based, each document providing a section on implementing elements of IPC and AMS in patient care. International organisations should be advocates for IPC and AMS, framing them as patient safety issues and emphasizing the importance of implementation skills. Healthcare authorities at the national level should adopt a similar approach and provide legal frameworks, guidelines, and resources to allow better implementation of patient safety measures in IPC and AMS. Rather than repeating effectiveness studies in every setting, we should invest in methods to improve the implementation of evidence-based measures in different healthcare contexts. For this, we need to encourage and financially support collaborations between social sciences and clinical IPC research.
Experts of the 2017 Geneva Think Tank on IPC and AMS, CDC, and WHO agreed that sustained efforts on implementation of IPC and AMS strategies are required at international, country, and hospital management levels, to provide an adequate multimodal framework that addresses (not exclusively) leadership, resources, education and training for implementing IPC and AMS. Future strategies can build on this agreement to make strategies on IPC and AMS more effective.
全球约有 5-15%的医院患者遭受医疗保健相关感染(HAI),多年来人类和动物医学中过度使用抗菌药物导致出现了新的抗菌药物耐药性(AMR)。已经发布了相当数量的循证措施来应对这些挑战,但最大的挑战似乎是这些措施的实施。
2017 年 6 月,共有 42 名专家在日内瓦 IPC-Think Tank 聚集一堂,讨论实施科学的四个领域:1)教授实施技能;2)通过政策制定促进感染预防和控制(IPC)和抗菌药物管理(AMS)的实施;3)促进实施技能的国家/国际行动;4)将社会科学与临床研究相结合,开展转化研究,以促进感染预防和控制(IPC)和抗菌药物耐药性(AMR)。
虽然过去被忽视,但实施技能已成为 IPC 和 AMS 的重点。现在,它们应该成为任何医疗保健课程的一部分,并且应该创建 IPC 职业道路。指南和政策应该相互一致,并基于证据,每个文件都应该提供一个关于在患者护理中实施 IPC 和 AMS 元素的部分。国际组织应该倡导 IPC 和 AMS,将其作为患者安全问题,并强调实施技能的重要性。国家一级的医疗保健当局应采取类似的方法,并提供法律框架、指南和资源,以允许在 IPC 和 AMS 中更好地实施患者安全措施。我们不应在每个环境中重复有效性研究,而应投资于改善不同医疗保健环境中基于证据的措施的实施方法。为此,我们需要鼓励并在财务上支持临床 IPC 研究与社会科学之间的合作。
2017 年日内瓦 IPC 和 AMS 思维库、疾病预防控制中心和世界卫生组织的专家一致认为,需要在国际、国家和医院管理层一级持续努力实施 IPC 和 AMS 战略,提供一个充分的多模式框架,解决(不仅是)领导、资源、IPC 和 AMS 的教育和培训。未来的战略可以在此协议的基础上制定更有效的 IPC 和 AMS 战略。