Better cleaning of hospital equipment can reduce patient infections by one-third-and saving money

Infections acquired in the hospital are infections that patients did not have when they were admitted to the hospital. . most often They include wound infections after surgery, urinary tract infections and pneumonia.

They can have a great impact on patients, often increasing their time in the hospital, requiring additional treatment and causing discomfort. Unfortunately, some people who support the infection in the hospital do not recover. In Australia, she is estimated 7,500 deaths Every year related to infections on hospital protections.

It is essential to prevent such infections not only for the benefit of patients, but also because of them The cost of the healthcare system and to reduce the employ of antibiotics.

Although patients usually do not contact each other directly in hospitals, there are many ways to transfer bacteria between patients.

Our own AND Other tests Suggests that medical equipment (such as pressure machines, dressings and drip racks) can be common Source of infection.

In recent studies, we have shown that by regularly disinfecting common medical equipment we can support reduce received in hospitals – i Save the money of the healthcare system.

We have introduced a modern cleaning package

We conducted experiment in the Modern South Wales Hospital, where we He introduced the package additional cleaning agents at several departments.

The package consisted of designated cleaning agents specially trained to neat and disinfect sensitive medical equipment. Usually cleaning common equipment is the duty of clinical staff.

These cleaners spent three hours a day, disinfecting common medical equipment in the ward. We also presented regular training and feedback.

The date of commencement of the cleaning package in each ward was randomly elected. It is known as “Clinled wedge“Process (more on this subject later).

We monitor the accuracy of cleaning before and after the introduction of the cleaning package, using Fluorescent gel marker for common equipment. The gel cannot be seen without special airy, but it can be easily removed if the surface is well cleaned.

We also monitored infections in patients in wards before and after introducing the cleaning package. During the experiment, over 5,000 patients passed through the studies studied.

Finally, we looked at economic costs and benefits: how much does the cleaning package cost, compared to healthcare costs, which can be saved thanks to avid infections.

What we found

Before the intervention, we found that the accuracy of cleaning the common equipment, assessed by removing the gel marker, was low. After introducing the cleaning package, it has improved cleaning 24% to 66%.

After introducing a hospital infection cleaning package fell about a thirdfrom 14.9% to 9.8% of patients. We have observed a reduction in various types of infections, including bloodstream infections, urinary tract infections and surgical wound infections.

In other words, for each 1000 patients admitted to wards with a cleaning package, we estimated 30 less infection Compared to the branches before the introduction of the cleaning package. This not only benefits patients, but also hospitals and communities, by releasing resources that can be used to treat other patients.

Treatment of infection in the hospital is costly. We estimate that the cost of treating infection before the cleaning intervention amounted to around $ 2.1 million for a group of 1000 patients resulting from 130 infections. These costs come from additional time in hospital costs and treatment costs related to infections.

We estimated 30 less infection per 1000 patients, reduced costs to USD 1.5 million, even taking into account the costs of cleaning agents and cleaning products. In other words, our intervention can save the hospital $ 642,000 for every 1000 patients.

Some restrictions on our research

Our experiment was narrow to several departments in one Australian hospital. It is possible that cleaning was particularly tender in this hospital, and the same intervention in other hospitals may not cause the same benefit.

For various reasons, even with trained designated cleaning agents, we did not find that every equipment was cleaned all the time. This reflects common problems with the real world in a busy ward. For example, some devices were used and are not available for cleaning, and cleaning agents were sometimes absent due to illness.

We do not know if even greater cleaning could cause even more reduction of infection, but it often exists The right of decreasing phrases During assessment of the intervention of infection control.

Limiting the view of the indicators of infection before and after the intervention is that other things may change at the same time, such as staff levels, so not the entire difference in infections may result from intervention.

But the recessed wedge model, in which the cleaning package was introduced at different times in different departments, increases our certainty that the reduction of infection was the result of the cleaning package.

The upgrade of the hospital cleaning is not a blessing

Shared medical equipment Pathogens that can survive for a long time in healthcare environments.

Like our study, other studies suggest that a neat hospital is a protected hospital. Importantly, cleaning must include thorough disinfection to reduce the risk of infection (not only removing perceptible dirt and stains).

Our work is also in line with Other tests This shows that improvement in hospitals is profitable.

There were often cleaning services and products subject to cuts When hospitals had to save money.

But the prioritization of effective cleaning of medical equipment seems to be a bat for healthcare system administrators. We must invest in better cleaning practices for both patients’ health and financial.