Frontline staff understanding of carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales infection prevention and control measures – A cross-sectional survey conducted in Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The Community of Practice (CoP) group, comprising members from Trillium Health Partners (THP), Halton Healthcare (HH) and William Osler Health System (WOHS) executed an education needs assessment survey. The objective of this survey was to evaluate the knowledge and understanding of carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales (CPE) best practices amongst frontline staff across three organizations. Methods: A quantitative, cross-sectional survey consisting of 10 questions was developed and distributed across the three organizations. Responses were independently reviewed by each site, and data from all sites were aggregated. The combined data were subsequently examined, charted and graphed in Microsoft Excel. The results were displayed both by hospital site and in a combined format. Results: A total of 514 frontline staff completed the survey across all sites. While 86% of respondents were familiar with the term CPE, only 30% felt confident in explaining what CPE is. Furthermore, only 67% of respondents identified the appropriate isolation measures for CPE-positive patients, and 61% recognized the appropriate measures for CPE-exposed patients. Additionally, 57% were unable to identify the correct disposal process for liquid waste. Although 81% of respondents understood the severity of CPE infections, only 57% agreed that CPE-positive patients require ongoing additional precautions. Finally, only 25% could correctly identify when to collect CPE screening swabs for newly admitted patients per hospital policy. Conclusions: The survey responses revealed consistent gaps in CPE knowledge and education across all three organizations. Although respondents demonstrated some understanding of CPE infections, including the ability to identify the organism and recognize its potential negative patient outcomes, significant knowledge deficiencies were evident. Across all sites, there was low confidence in managing CPE-positive patients and implementing appropriate additional precautions. Moreover, respondents exhibited a lack of comprehension regarding organizational policies and practices related to hand hygiene sink usage, liquid waste disposal, and screening of new admissions. These findings highlight the need for targeted educational interventions to address these deficiencies and enhance CPE management practices across the organizations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".