Title |
Implementation of infection control best practice in intensive care units throughout Europe: a mixed-method evaluation study
|
---|---|
Published in |
Implementation Science, February 2013
|
DOI | 10.1186/1748-5908-8-24 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Hugo Sax, Lauren Clack, Sylvie Touveneau, Fabricio da Liberdade Jantarada, Didier Pittet, Walter Zingg, PROHIBIT study group |
Abstract |
The implementation of evidence-based infection control practices is essential, yet challenging for healthcare institutions worldwide. Although acknowledged that implementation success varies with contextual factors, little is known regarding the most critical specific conditions within the complex cultural milieu of varying economic, political, and healthcare systems. Given the increasing reliance on unified global schemes to improve patient safety and healthcare effectiveness, research on this topic is needed and timely. The 'InDepth' work package of the European FP7 Prevention of Hospital Infections by Intervention and Training (PROHIBIT) consortium aims to assess barriers and facilitators to the successful implementation of catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) prevention in intensive care units (ICU) across several European countries. |
X Demographics
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 3 | 18% |
Switzerland | 1 | 6% |
United Kingdom | 1 | 6% |
Unknown | 12 | 71% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 12 | 71% |
Scientists | 3 | 18% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 6% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 3 | 1% |
Australia | 1 | <1% |
Canada | 1 | <1% |
Denmark | 1 | <1% |
United States | 1 | <1% |
Unknown | 224 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 43 | 19% |
Researcher | 28 | 12% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 25 | 11% |
Student > Postgraduate | 18 | 8% |
Other | 16 | 7% |
Other | 50 | 22% |
Unknown | 51 | 22% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 49 | 21% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 45 | 19% |
Social Sciences | 19 | 8% |
Business, Management and Accounting | 9 | 4% |
Psychology | 8 | 3% |
Other | 40 | 17% |
Unknown | 61 | 26% |