scholarly journals Hospital Acquired Infections in Low and Middle Income Countries: Root Cause Analysis and the Development of Infection Control Practices in Bangladesh

2016 ◽  
Vol 06 (01) ◽  
pp. 28-39 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. M. Shahida ◽  
Anisul Islam ◽  
Bimalangshu R. Dey ◽  
Ferdousi Islam ◽  
Kartik Venkatesh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Infection Control ◽  
Root Cause Analysis ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Cause Analysis ◽  
Hospital Acquired Infections ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Root Cause ◽  
Hospital Acquired ◽  
Low And Middle Income

scholarly journals Highlighting the need for more infection control practitioners in low- and middle-income countries

2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 160-163 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. Lipke ◽  
C. Emerson ◽  
C. McCarthy ◽  
M. Briggs-Hagen ◽  
J. Farley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Infection Control ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Low And Middle Income

scholarly journals 154Gap Analysis of infection control practices in low and middle income countries (LMIC): Role of antimicrobial stewardship

2014 ◽  
Vol 1 (suppl_1) ◽  
pp. S75-S75
Author(s):  
Kristy Weinshel ◽  
Angela Dramowski ◽  
Katerina Mougkou ◽  
Chimanjita Phukan ◽  
Agnes Hajdu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Infection Control ◽  
Antimicrobial Stewardship ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Low And Middle Income

Gap Analysis of Infection Control Practices in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

2015 ◽  
Vol 36 (10) ◽  
pp. 1208-1214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristy Weinshel ◽  
Angela Dramowski ◽  
Ágnes Hajdu ◽  
Saul Jacob ◽  
Basudha Khanal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hand Hygiene ◽  
Infection Control ◽  
Assessment Tool ◽  
High Income ◽  
Healthcare Associated Infection ◽  
Surgical Equipment ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Healthcare Associated ◽  
Low And Middle Income

BACKGROUNDHealthcare-associated infection rates are higher in low- and middle-income countries compared with high-income countries, resulting in relatively larger incidence of patient mortality and disability and additional healthcare costs.OBJECTIVETo use the Infection Control Assessment Tool to assess gaps in infection control (IC) practices in the participating countries.METHODSSix international sites located in Argentina, Greece, Hungary, India, Nepal, and South Africa provided information on the health facility and the surgical modules relating to IC programs, surgical antibiotic use and surgical equipment procedures, surgical area practices, sterilization and disinfection of equipment and intravenous fluid, and hand hygiene. Modules were scored for each country.RESULTSThe 6 international sites completed 5 modules. Of 121 completed sections, scores of less than 50% of the recommended IC practices were received in 23 (19%) and scores from 50% to 75% were received in 43 (36%). IC programs had various limitations in many sites and surveillance of healthcare-associated infections was not consistently performed. Lack of administration of perioperative antibiotics, inadequate sterilization and disinfection of equipment, and paucity of hand hygiene were found even in a high-income country. There was also a lack of clearly written defined policies and procedures across many facilities.CONCLUSIONSOur results indicate that adherence to recommended IC practices is suboptimal. Opportunities for improvement of IC practices exist in several areas, including hospital-wide IC programs and surveillance, antibiotic stewardship, written and posted guidelines and policies across a range of topics, surgical instrument sterilization procedures, and improved hand hygiene.Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol. 2015;36(10):1208–1214

scholarly journals Development of National Infection Control and Prevention Guidelines in Georgia, 2017–2019

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. s189-s189
Author(s):  
Lali Madzgarashvili ◽  
Jamine Weiss ◽  
Marina Baidauri ◽  
Marika Geleishvili ◽  
Meghan Lyman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Infection Control ◽  
Clinical Laboratory ◽  
Health And Safety ◽  
Steering Committee ◽  
Infection Prevention And Control ◽  
Healthcare Associated Infection ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
International Guidelines ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Low And Middle Income

Background: In 2015, the Ministry of Internally Displaced Persons from the Occupied Territories, Labor, Health and Social Affairs (MoLHSA) of Georgia identified infection prevention and control (IPC) as a top priority. Infection control legislation was adopted and compliance was made mandatory for licensure. Participation in the universal healthcare system requires facilities to have an IPC program and infrastructure. To support facilities to improve IPC, MoLHSA and the National Center for Disease Control and Public Health (NCDC) requested assistance from the US CDC to revise the 2009 National IPC guidelines, which were translated versions of international guidelines and not adapted to the Georgian context. Methods: An IPC guideline technical working group (TWG), comprising clinical epidemiologists, IPC nurses, head nurses, and infectious diseases doctors from the NCDC, academic and healthcare organizations and the CDC was formed to lead the development of the national IPC guidelines. Additionally, an IPC steering committee was established to review and verify the guidelines’ compliance with applicable decrees and regulations. The TWG began work in April 2017 and was divided into 4 subgroups, each responsible for developing specific guideline topics. A general IPC guideline template for low- and middle-income countries was used to develop 7 of the guidelines. Additional reference materials and international guidelines were used to develop all the guidelines. Drafts were shared with the subgroups and the steering committee during 2 workshops to discuss unresolved technical issues and to validate the guidelines. Results: The revised guidelines consist of 18 topics. In addition to standard precautions (eg, hand hygiene, personal protective equipment, injection safety, etc) and transmission-based precautions, the guideline topics include laundry, environmental cleaning and disinfection, decontamination and sterilization, occupational health and safety, biosafety in clinical laboratory, blood bank and transfusion services, intensive care unit, emergency room, and mortuary. They do not include healthcare-associated infection surveillance or organism-specific guidance. To supplement the guidelines, a separate implementation manual was developed. The guidelines were approved by MoLHSA in October 2019. The TWG continues to be engaged in IPC activities, assisting with guideline rollout, training, and monitoring, and drafting the National IPC strategy and action plans. Conclusions: The Georgian Ministry of Health developed national IPC guidelines using local experts. This model can be replicated in other low- and middle-income countries that lack country-specific IPC guidelines. It can also be adapted to develop facility-level guidelines and standard operating procedures.Funding: NoneDisclosures: None

scholarly journals Assessing the Burden ofClostridium difficileInfection in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

2018 ◽  
Vol 56 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
G. A. Roldan ◽  
A. X. Cui ◽  
N. R. Pollock
Keyword(s):  
Clostridium Difficile ◽  
Antibiotic Stewardship ◽  
Morbidity And Mortality ◽  
Resource Limited Settings ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Resource Limited ◽  
Hospital Acquired ◽  
Low And Middle Income

ABSTRACTIn contrast to the significant resources invested in the diagnosis and prevention ofClostridium difficileinfection (CDI) in resource-rich settings, in resource-limited settings patients with community- and hospital-acquired diarrhea may not routinely be tested for CDI. Is CDI actually less frequent or severe in resource-limited settings, or might we be missing an important opportunity to prevent CDI-related morbidity and mortality (and to promote antibiotic stewardship) in these settings? Here, we review the literature to assess the overall burden of CDI in low- and middle-income countries.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document