s13756-019-0527-1.pdf (604.53 kB)
Download file

Implementation research for the prevention of antimicrobial resistance and healthcare-associated infections; 2017 Geneva infection prevention and control (IPC)-think tank (part 1).

Download (604.53 kB)
journal contribution
posted on 2019-06-13, 10:44 authored by W Zingg, J Storr, BJ Park, R Ahmad, C Tarrant, E Castro-Sanchez, S Tomczyk, C Kilpatrick, B Allegranzi, D Cardo, D Pittet, 2017 Geneva IPC-Think Tank
Background: 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. Methods: 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. Results: 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. Conclusions: 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.

Funding

The 2017 Geneva IPC-Think Tank was supported by the US Centers for Disease Prevention and Control, and the University of Geneva Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Switzerland.

History

Citation

Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control, 2019, 8:87

Author affiliation

/Organisation/COLLEGE OF LIFE SCIENCES/School of Medicine/Department of Health Sciences

Version

VoR (Version of Record)

Published in

Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control

Publisher

BMC (part of Springer Nature)

eissn

2047-2994

Acceptance date

2019-04-23

Copyright date

2019

Available date

2019-06-13

Publisher version

https://aricjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13756-019-0527-1

Language

en