Long-term prevention of catheter-associated urinary tract infections among critically ill patients through the implementation of an educational program and a daily checklist for maintenance of indwelling urinary catheters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Removing an indwelling urinary catheter as soon as possible is the cornerstone of catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTI) prevention. However, implementing this measure may be challenging in clinical settings. To evaluate the impact of implementing a healthcare workers (HCWs) educational program and a daily checklist for indwelling urinary catheter indications among critical patients on the incidence of CAUTI. METHODS: This was a quasi-experimental study performed in a general intensive care unit of a tertiary-care hospital over a 12 years period, from January 1, 2005 to December 31, 2016. Rates of urinary catheter use and incidence density of CAUTI were monthly evaluated following the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) criteria throughout the study period. Phase I (2005-2006) was the pre-intervention period. In phase II (2007-2010), HCWs routine training on CAUTI prevention was performed twice-a-year. In phase III (2011-2014), we implemented a daily checklist for indwelling urinary catheter indications, in addition to the biannual training. In phase IV, (2015-2016) the biannual training was replaced by training only newly hired HCWs and the daily checklist was maintained. RESULTS: The mean rate of urinary catheter utilization decreased from phase I to phase IV (73.1%, 74.1%, 54.9%, and 45.6%, respectively). Similarly, the incidence density of CAUTI decreased from phase I to phase IV (14.9, 7.3, 3.8, and 1.1 per 1000 catheter-days, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: HCWs education and daily evaluation of indwelling urinary catheter indications were highly effective in reducing the rates of catheter utilization as well as the incidence density of CAUTI.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".