1077. Infection Control Informatics Use and Satisfaction among SHEA and APIC Members
Session: Poster Abstract Session: Surveillance of HAIs: Implementation and National Perspectives
Friday, October 4, 2013
Room: The Moscone Center: Poster Hall C
Posters
  • 2013-09-18_poster.pdf (153.5 kB)
  • Background: Computer physician order entry systems (CPOE) and supplementary infection control software (SICS) play a crucial role in hospital infection control, epidemiology, and antimicrobial stewardship. Hospitals must choose between multiple CPOEs and SICSs from different vendors, but little information comparing their capabilities and user satisfaction is available.

    Methods: We distributed a 22 question web-based survey to hospital epidemiologists (HE) and infection preventionists (IP) via the SHEA Research Network and APIC listserv. Respondents were asked what CPOE/SCIS their institution used and about their capabilities, user satisfaction, cost, and customizability.

    Results: We received 119 responses (63 from SHEA; 56 from APIC). Fifty respondents (42% overall; n=48 for SHEA and n=2 for APIC) were HE while 69 (58%; n=15 for SHEA and n=54 for APIC) were IP.

    The most commonly used CPOEs were Epic (25%), Cerner (17%), Meditech (9%) and McKesson (7%). Most respondents (80%) used a commercial SICS, including Medmined (Cardinal; 24%), Thera-Doc (Hospira; 17%), SafetySurveillor (Premier; 14%), and Sentri-7 (1%).

    Respondents rated satisfaction with their infection control software (1=not satisfied to 10 =very satisfied). Those with commercial SICS had a mean satisfaction score of 7.0 (SD 2.3) overall compared with 3.2 (SD 2.2) for those without (Figure). Satisfaction was similar among common CPOEs (Epic, Cerner, Meditech, and McKesson) used with SICS.

    Respondents also indicated the likelihood they would still be using the same infection control software in two years (1=not likely; 10=very likely). The mean response for commercial SICS users was 7.4 (SD 3.0) overall; 6.3 (SD 3.1) for SHEA; 8.3 (2.7) for APIC). For those without, the overall mean was 3.9 (SD 2.7); 4 (SD 2.9) for SHEA; 3.3 (SD 1.2) for APIC.

    Conclusion: There is substantial heterogeneity in CPOE and SICS usage. Respondents at institutions with commercial SICS were generally more satisfied with their infection control and antimicrobial stewardship software than those at institutions without commercial SICS. SHEA respondents were in general less satisfied with their infection control software than APIC respondents.

    Figure. Satisfaction with infection control software by commercial SICS usage and respondent affiliation.

    Max Masnick, BA1, Daniel Morgan, MD, MS2, Marc-Oliver Wright, MT(ASCP), MS, CIC 3, Michael Y. Lin, MD, MPH4, Lisa Pineles, MA2, Anthony D. Harris, MD, MPH5 and the SHEA Research Network, (1)Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Maryland Baltimore, Baltimore, MD, (2)Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, (3)NorthShore University HealthSystem, Evanston, IL, (4)Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, (5)Departmetn of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD

    Disclosures:

    M. Masnick, None

    D. Morgan, Welch Allyn : Consultant, Consulting fee
    Sanogiene : Consultant, Consulting fee

    M. O. Wright, None

    M. Y. Lin, None

    L. Pineles, None

    A. D. Harris, Premier: Consultant, Consulting fee
    Cubist: Consultant, Consulting fee
    Sanogiene: Consultant, Consulting fee
    UpToDate, Online: Consultant, Consulting fee

    Previous Abstract | Next Abstract >>

    Findings in the abstracts are embargoed until 12:01 a.m. PST, Oct. 2nd with the exception of research findings presented at the IDWeek press conferences.