Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T21:37:23.643Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Population Standardized Infection Ratio (pSIR): A More Meaningful Reflection of Performance With Reduction in Device Use

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 November 2020

Mamta Sharma
Affiliation:
St. John Hospital
Angelo Bufalino
Affiliation:
Ascension Data Sciences Institute, Ascension, St. Louis, Missouri
Ren-huai Huang
Affiliation:
Ascension Data Sciences Institute, Ascension
Lisa Sturm
Affiliation:
Clinial & Network Service, Ascension Healthcare
Network Service
Affiliation:
Ascension Healthcare
Thomas Erlinger
Affiliation:
Ascension Data Science Institute
Mohamad Fakih
Affiliation:
Ascension Healthcare
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Background: Interventions to reduce unnecessary device use may select a higher-risk population, leading to a paradoxical increase in SIR for some high-performing facilities. The standardized utilization ratio (SUR) adjusts for device use for different units and facilities. We evaluated the performance of a population SIR (pSIR) metric compared to device SIR (dSIR) in the situations of increased, decreased, and no change in SUR for a large system. Methods: We evaluated hospitals that had a reduction, increase, and no substantial change (±5% relative change) in their SUR in FY2019 (July 2018–June 2019) compared to baseline FY2017 (July 2016–June 2017). The dSIR (defined as Σ observed events divided by Σ predicted events based on actual device days) and pSIR (defined as Σ observed events divided by Σ predicted events based on predicted device days). We calculated the cumulative attributable difference (CAD) for catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTIs) for the same facilities based on dSIR and pSIR. Results: Overall, the system SUR dropped from 0.92 in 2017 to 0.85 in 2019 (7.3% decrease). Of the 48 hospitals included, 25 (52%) exhibited a drop, 13 (27%) exhibited an increase, and 10 (21%) had no change in SUR during 2019. For hospitals in which SUR decreased, the dSIR decreased by 15.9% from 0.88 to 0.74, and the pSIR decreased by 32.3% from 0.85 to 0.58 (Table 1). In 2019, the CAD for CAUTI to a target SIR of 1 was 133 for the dSIR compared to 181 for the pSIR, and 36% more events were avoided. Conclusions: The traditional SIR (dSIR) underestimated improvements in infection rates compared to the pSIR because it failed to account for reduced device utilization associated with infection prevention interventions. The pSIR accounts for overall risk of infection associated with device exposure in a population and better reflects the efficacy of prevention efforts compared to dSIR. The pSIR should be considered in situations in which interventions have led to substantial reductions in device use.

Funding: None

Disclosures: None

Type
Top Rated Posters Presentations
Copyright
© 2020 by The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America. All rights reserved.