Economicks is hard!

I had the privilege of training in hospital epidemiology under Dr. Richard Wenzel, and alongside a number of really smart people (including fellow blogger Mike Edmond). We put a lot of time and energy into estimating the impact of HAIs on costs, lengths of hospital stay (LOS), and mortality…and our approach was simple and intuitive. If our HAI cases had a mean cost/LOS/mortality of x, and matched controls had mean cost/LOS/mortality of y, then the attributable cost/LOS/mortality must be x minus y. Right?



Yes, I’m oversimplifying, and I will give us credit for understanding that it was a little more complicated than that. However, at that time we were still trying to convince people that HAIs actually killed people, and that the damage they did was above and beyond that due to the patient’s underlying illness. So if our estimates were on the high side, it seemed OK (at least to me), since the main purpose was to jar people out of their complacency and increase resources for prevention.



The climate has changed. We know a lot more about the complexity of estimating the costs of HAIs (two excellent sources on this are here and here), and we’ve (at long last) succeeded in attracting needed attention to HAI prevention (from the public, from legislators, from the media, even from our hospital administrators!). So it now behooves us to “take it up a notch”, as advocated by Nicholas Graves and colleagues in a recent letter to the editor at ICHE (with response). You can read these at your leisure, but I want to highlight this section of their CID article, which I think is on target:

"The 'HAI costs a lot' approach to influencing decision making has served the infection control community well…..The time has arrived, however, for the methodological advances that have been achieved in this area to be implemented by researchers. Complete economic evaluations that include changes to all costs and health benefits should be performed...

The information used to update these studies should be of high quality and bias free. Inexorable growth in health care costs is forcing decision makers to respond to scarcity and work toward extracting greater value from health care resources….The time when reliable economic arguments will be paramount for obtaining extra resources—and even retaining existing ones—is close. Those working toward reducing the number of HAIs should craft valid economic arguments on the basis of sound methods and use them to build strong and cost-effective infection control programs"

ICHE Special Issue: Antimicrobial Stewardship

Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology has just announced that it will publish a special issue devoted to antimicrobial stewardship in conjunction with the SHEA spring meeting in Jacksonville, Florida, April 13-16, 2012. 

Topics of interest include:

• Antimicrobial stewardship for special populations, including pediatrics, oncology, hemodialysis, and critical care
• Health outcome and cost effectiveness impact of antimicrobial stewardship
• Use of diagnostic tools and role of microbiology in antimicrobial stewardship
• Effective implementation of programs in community hospitals, long-term care acute care facilities, outpatient settings and non-acute healthcare settings (e.g., dialysis, ambulatory care and ambulatory surgery centers)

Due date: October 1, 2011.

Get writing and submit your paper here.

Call for manuscripts PDF available here.

Good luck!

The new ICHE is here, the new ICHE is here!!!

Congrats to all of the authors who had articles published in this August's ICHE. Now that ICHE has a massive new impact score, I suspect most of them now feel like Navin when he says, "Page 73 - Johnson, Navin R.!  - I'm somebody now! Millions of people look at this book everyday! This is the kind of spontaneous publicity - your name in print - that makes people. I'm in print! Things are going to start happening to me now."  Well, I hope all the things that happen to these fine authors are a little more positive.

Highlights:

Page 737, Boyce, John M et al. looked at the impact of an automated mobile UV-C light unit on environmental contamination in 25 rooms after patient discharge. They report the unit significantly reduced aerobic colony counts and C. difficile spores.

Page 743, Rutala, William A et al. wrote an accompanying editorial that concluded that "there is now ample evidence that no-touch systems such as UV-C light or hydrogen peroxide can reduce environmental contamination...(however) only a single study using a before-after design has been published that demonstrated that such a system can reduce healthcare-associated infections." There we go again, hospital infection prevention: the queen (or king) of intermediate outcomes. Would be pretty cool if there were more independent (federal or foundation) resources to study HAI prevention interventions, such as these.

Page 791, Gupta, Kalpana et al. report the results of a cohort of all patients at the VA Boston Health Care System that had clean or clean-contaminated in 2008-2009 and a nasal MRSA PCR test less than 31 days prior to surgery. 6.6% of the patients were MRSA+ and were at significantly higher risk for postoperative MRSA infections (RR, 8.46; 95% CI, 1.70–42.04). Interestingly, vancomycin prophylaxis was associated with higher SSI risk in those negative for nasal MRSA (RR, 4.34; 95% CI, 2.19–8.57) but not in MRSA+ patients.

Page 818, Tohme, Rania A et al. reviewed hepatitis B vaccination rates and immunity among healthcare students during a 10-year period at Emory University. They report that among 4,075 students, only 60% had documented vaccination and 84% had anti-HBs concentration greater than or equal to 10 mIU/mL. It is interesting that despite CDC and ACIP (1995) recommendations of routine vaccination of children aged 11-12 years, and for all less than 18yo in 1999, the majority of students were only recently vaccinated.

If I left you off this list, sorry! You are still awesome!