Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T06:43:50.064Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Influence of State Laws Mandating Reporting of Healthcare-Associated Infections: The Case of Central Line–Associated Bloodstream Infections

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Amy L. Pakyz  and
Michael B. Edmond
Amy L. Pakyz*
Affiliation:
Department of Pharmacotherapy and Outcomes Science, School of Pharmacy, Virginia Commonwealth University, Medical College of Virginia Campus, Richmond, Virginia
Michael B. Edmond
Affiliation:
Department of Medicine, School of Medicine, Virginia Commonwealth University, Medical College of Virginia Campus, Richmond, Virginia
*
Virginia Commonwealth University School of Pharmacy, 410 North 12th Street, P.O. Box 980533, Richmond, VA 23298 ([email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective.

To evaluate the impact of state laws on reporting of healthcare-associated infections on central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) rates.

Design.

Retrospective, cross-sectional study.

Methods.

Hospital-level administrative and Hospital Compare data were collected on University HealthSystem Consortium hospitals. An ordered probit regression model assessed the association between state legislation and CLABSI standardized infection ratio (SIR). The main independent variable was a state legislation variable concerning 3 legal requirements (data submission, reporting of data to the public, inclusion of facility identifiers in public reports) and was coded for hospitals accordingly located in a state that did not have CLABSI reporting, located in a state that had CLABSI reporting legislation and met 3 legal requirements, or located in a state that had CLABSI reporting but did not meet the 3 legal requirements. A secondary analysis ascertained whether the mean state SIR values differed among the 3 legislation groups.

Results.

There were 159 hospitals included; 92 were located in states that had CLABSI reporting and met 3 requirements, 33 were located in states that had reporting but did not meet the 3 requirements, and 34 were in states that had no legislation. There was no effect of state legislation group on CLABSI SIR. There were no significant differences in the mean state CLABSI SIRs among the legislation groups.

Conclusions.

In this sample of academic medical centers, there was no evidence of an effect of state HAI laws on CLABSI occurrence. The impact of state legislation may be lessened by other CLABSI prevention initiatives.

Type
Original Article
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 34 , Issue 8 , August 2013 , pp. 780 - 784
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 2013

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.Research Committee of the Society of Healthcare Epidemiology of America. Enhancing patient safety by reducing healthcare-associated infections: the role of discovery and dissemination. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2010;31:118–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Umscheid, CA, Mitchell, MD, Doshi, JA, Agarwal, R, Williams, K, Brennan, PJ. Estimating the proportion of healthcare-associated infections that are reasonable preventable and the related mortality and costs. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2011; 32:101–114.Google Scholar
3.Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology (APIC). HAI Reporting Laws and Regulations. Washington, DC: APIC, 2012. http://www.apic.org/Resource_/TinyMceFileManager/Advocacy-PDFs/HAI_map.gif. Accessed October 10, 2012.Google Scholar
4.Reagan, J. HAI Focus. Albuquerque, NM: HAI Focus, 2013. http://haifocus.com/about-hai-focus/. Accessed April 1, 2013.Google Scholar
5.US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Hospital Compare. Washington, DC: HHS, 2012. http://www.hospitalcompare.hhs.gov/. Accessed October 10, 2012.Google Scholar
6.National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN). NHSN e-News: SIRS Special Edition. Atlanta: NHSN, 2010. NHSN_NL_OCT_2010SE_final.pdf. Accessed November 19, 2012.Google Scholar
7.National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL). Lessons from the Pioneers: Reporting Healthcare-Associated Infections. Washington, DC: NCSL, 2013. http://www.ncsl.org/documents/health/haireport.pdf. Accessed April 1, 2013.Google Scholar
8.Reagan, J, Hacker, C. Laws pertaining to healthcare-associated infections: a review of 3 legal requirements. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2012;33:75–80.Google Scholar
9.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). National and State Healthcare-Associated Infections Standardized Infection Ratio Report. Atlanta: CDC, 2010. http://www.cdc.gov/hai/national-sir-jan-dec-2010/index.html. Accessed November 26, 2012.Google Scholar
10.Agency for Healthcare Quality and Research (AHRQ). AHRQ Patient Safety Project Reduces Bloodstream Infections by 40 Percent. Rockville, MD: AHRQ, 2012. http://www.ahrq.gov/news/press/pr2012/pspclabsipr.htm. Accessed November 9, 2012.Google Scholar
11.Pronovost, P, Needham, D, Berenholtz, S, et al.An intervention to decrease catheter-related bloodstream infections in the ICU. N Engl J Med 2006;355:2725–2732.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Lee, GM, Kleinman, K, Soumerai, SB, et al.Effect of nonpayment for preventable infections in U.S. hospitals. N Engl J Med 2012; 367:1428–1437.Google Scholar
13.Oh, JY, Cunningham, MC, Beldavs, ZG, et al.Statewide validation of hospital-reported central line-associated bloodstream infections: Oregon, 2009. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2012;33:439–445.Google Scholar
14.Backman, LA, Melchreit, R, Rodriguez, R. Validation of the surveillance and reporting of central line-associated bloodstream infection data to a state health department. Am J Infect Control 2010;38:832–838.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15.Lin, MY, Hota, B, Khan, YM, et al.Quality of traditional surveillance for public reporting of nosocomial bloodstream infection rates. JAMA 2010;304:2035–2041.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16.Digiorgio, MJ, Fatica, C, Oden, M, et al.Development of a modified surveillance definition of central line-associated bloodstream infections for patients with hematologic malignancies. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2012;33:865–868.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed