Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T07:54:22.141Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Casablanca Redux: We Are Shocked That Public Reporting of Rates of Central Line–Associated Bloodstream Infections Are Inaccurate

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Daniel J. Sexton ,
Luke F. Chen ,
Rebekah Moehring ,
Paul A. Thacker  and
Deverick J. Anderson
Daniel J. Sexton*
Affiliation:
Duke Infection Control Outreach Network and the Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
Luke F. Chen
Affiliation:
Duke Infection Control Outreach Network and the Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
Rebekah Moehring
Affiliation:
Duke Infection Control Outreach Network and the Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
Paul A. Thacker
Affiliation:
Duke Infection Control Outreach Network and the Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
Deverick J. Anderson
Affiliation:
Duke Infection Control Outreach Network and the Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
*
DUMC 102359, Durham, NC 27710 ([email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Commentary
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 33 , Issue 9 , September 2012 , pp. 932 - 935
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 2012 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Curtiz, M. Casablanca. Warner Brothers, 1942:102.Google Scholar
2. Haut, ER, Pronovost, PJ. Surveillance bias in outcomes reporting. JAMA 2011;305(23):2462–2463.Google Scholar
3. Lin, MY, Hota, B, Khan, YM, et al. Quality of traditional surveillance for public reporting of nosocomial bloodstream infection rates. JAMA 2010;304(18):2035–2041.Google Scholar
4. Perencevich, EN. Excess shock and mortality in Staphylococcus aureus related to methicillin resistance. Clin Infect Dis 2000;31(5):1311.10.1086/317433Google Scholar
5. American College of Surgeons. Join Leading Hospitals in CMS National Surgical Quality Pilot, http://www.facs.org/hospitalcompare/. Accessed February 20, 2012.Google Scholar
6. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. CDC's National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) Healthcare-associated Infections Summary Data Reports Q and A. http://www.cdc.gov/HAI/surveillance/QA_stateSummary.html. Accessed April 19, 2012.Google Scholar
7. Render, ML, Hasselbeck, R, Freyberg, RW, Hofer, TP, Sales, AE, Almenoff, PL. Reduction of central line infections in Veterans Administration intensive care units: an observational cohort using a central infrastructure to support learning and improvement. BMJ Qual Sal 2011;20(8):725–732.Google Scholar
8. McKee, C, Berkowitz, I, Cosgrove, SE, et al. Reduction of catheter-associated bloodstream infections in pediatric patients: experimentation and reality. Pediatr Crit Care Med 2008;9(1):40–46.10.1097/01.PCC.0000299821.46193.A3Google Scholar
9. Berhe, M, Edmond, MB, Bearman, G. Measurement and feedback of infection control process measures in the intensive care unit: impact on compliance. Am J Infect Control 2006;34(8):537–539.Google Scholar
10. Anderson, DJ, Miller, BA, Chen, LF, et al. The network approach for prevention of healthcare-associated infections: long-term effect of participation in the Duke Infection Control Outreach Network. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2011;32(4):315–322.Google Scholar
11. Sexton, DJ, Chen, LF, Anderson, DJ. Current definitions of central line-associated bloodstream infection: is the emperor wearing clothes? Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2010;31(12):1286–1289.Google Scholar
12. Fraser, TG, Gordon, SM. CLABSI rates in immunocompromised patients: a valuable patient centered outcome? Clin Infect Dis 2011;52(12):1446–1450.Google Scholar
13. White, JT, Fraimow, H. Consistency versus accuracy in reporting central line-associated bloodstream infections. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2011;32(5):519–520.Google Scholar
14. Oh, JY, Cunningham, MC, Beldavs, ZG, et al. Statewide validation of hospital-reported central line-associated bloodstream infection. Oregon 2009. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2012;33:439–445.Google Scholar
15. Arnold, KE, Thompson, ND. Commentary: building data quality and confidence in data reported to the National Healthcare Safety Network. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2012;33:446–448.Google Scholar
16. Niedner, MF. The harder you look, the more you find: catheter-associated bloodstream infection surveillance variability. Am J Infect Control 2010;28(8):585–595.10.1016/j.ajic.2010.04.211Google Scholar