Hospital infection numbers releasedUnconfirmed info called too raw for comparisons By Jill Coley (Contact)
The Post and Courier
Wednesday, August 6, 2008
Six more months worth of data cataloging hospital- associated infections in South Carolina was made public Monday. DHEC's latest dataHealthcare Acquired Infections Report (updated Aug. 1, 2008) But state health officials warn the information is unconfirmed and too raw to be used to compare hospitals. The latest report equals a year's worth of data that can be viewed by the public on S.C. Department of Health and Environmental Control's Web site. Dr. Jerry J. Gibson, director of DHEC's Bureau of Disease Control, said, "It would be unwise to use the reports to compare hospitals because of the small numbers and lack of verification." State health officials are still checking the quality and accuracy of their data. A report requiring DHEC to compare hospitals is due Feb. 1. Past storiesHospital infection report lagging; Validation of data cited as biggest remaining hurdle, published 12/05/07 DHEC publishes first report on hospital infections, published 02/02/08 The Hospital Infections Disclosure Act became state law in May 2006 and mandates that hospitals report preventable infections to health officials. Only a handful of states require such public reporting. So far, only certain types of infections are tracked: central line-associated bloodstream infections; surgical site infections for selected procedures; and laboratory blood cultures positive for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, also known as MRSA. Additional reporting procedures will be added. "We're still early in this, even though it's the second six months," said Dr. Rick Foster, vice president for quality and patient safety with the S.C. Hospital Association. "Over time, we will get enough data to look at trends." Variables such as hospital size and patients' level of disease make it difficult to compare numbers. Take, for example, central line infections. Central lines are tubes placed in large veins to allow fluids or medication to be given for a long period of time. These lifelines can turn fatal when a microbe gets into the catheter and traces a path to the heart and lungs. Hospitals submit to DHEC the number of infections per "central line day," which are the total number of days of exposure to the central line. Factors that must be considered are hospital size, reflected in the number of central line days, and where the patients are in the hospital, which reflects frailty and risk for infection. Facilities in Charleston County reporting central line associated blood stream infections in intensive care units ranged from 1.1 to 5.2 per 1,000 central line days. "We have not made the progress I'd like to see," said patient advocate and Aiken resident Dianne Parker, who is a member of the Hospital Infection Disclosure Act Advisory Committee. Her husband of more than 40 years, Willie Parker, died in 2007 after a struggle with hospital-acquired MRSA following knee surgery. "We all know we have a problem. It is not rocket science. We can count," Parker said. Reach Jill Coley at 937-5719 or jcoley@postandcourier.com. |
Article tools |
|
Notice about comments: Charleston.net is pleased to offer readers the ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Charleston.net does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not charleston.net. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "suggest removal" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website. Full terms and conditions can be read here. |
Comments
This article has 4 comment(s)
Posted by lou9 on August 6, 2008 at 9:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I agree Early. They are saying the data is "too raw" to compare hospitals. That sounds like political speak to cover up the fact that they are doing a lousy job of protecting the patients they are supposed to be healing.
Posted by newbattleaxe on August 6, 2008 at 11:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Early, that's STAPH infection, short for staphylococcus. Staph bacteria live everywhere, and are opportunistic little beggars. They are the same sort of bacteria that were at the heart of the massive hospital-based infections in the late 60's and early 70's when hexachlorophene was banned as a cleaning agent. (Remember Phisohex?)
Ashley, I remember those nurses. They were no cleaner than our present-day nurses and nursing assistants. In fact, you'd be very impressed by the infection control training these women and men go through regularly.
Lou, how often does your job entail data reduction and statistics? One is a datum - the first set of measurements six months ago. They now have data - two sets of measurements. Give them a third set, and they just might be able to tell us something REAL.
Posted by lou9 on August 6, 2008 at 1:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Newbattleaxe- I collect and analyze data every day in my job. But I don't dismiss findings just because they say something I don't want to hear. Calling something "too raw" just because it didn't give you the desired outcome tells people you have something to hide.
Posted by hoyce on August 6, 2008 at 9:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Many of the elderly patients come to the hospital with MRSA/VRE and such from their nursing homes or transferring hospitals. If they were transferred from another hospital and the cultures come back positive once they are at the new facility, guess who gets to claim it? THE NEW FACILITY where they may have only been 24-48 hours. So the data can be misleading.