An evaluation of the electronic reporting system for the enhanced surveillance of carbapenemase-producing Gram-negative bacteria in England. Issue 1 (May 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Jermacane, D.; Coope, C.M.; Ironmonger, D.; Cleary, P.; Muller-Pebody, B.; Hope, R.; Hopkins, S.; Puleston, R.; Freeman, R.; Hopkins, K.L.; Johnson, A.P.; Woodford, N.; Oliver, I.
• Is Part Of: Journal of hospital infection. Volume 102:Issue 1(2019)
• Page Start: 17
• Page End: 24
• Publication Date: 2019-05
• Subjects: Carbapenemase-producing Gram-negative bacteria -- Electronic reporting system -- Surveillance -- Public Health England -- Evaluation; Cross infection -- Periodicals; Cross infection -- Prevention -- Periodicals; Nosocomial infections -- Periodicals; Nosocomial infections -- Prevention -- Periodicals; Cross Infection -- Periodicals; Cross Infection -- prevention & control -- Periodicals; Infection Control -- Periodicals; Electronic journals; 614.44
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jhin.2019.01.005
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0195-6701

Abstract

Summary: Background: An electronic reporting system (ERS) for the enhanced surveillance of carbapenemase-producing Gram-negative bacteria (CPGNB) was launched by Public Health England in May 2015. Aim: This evaluation aimed to assess uptake, timeliness and completeness of data provided and explore potential barriers and facilitators to adopting the system. Methods: The evaluation comprised a retrospective analysis of surveillance data and semi-structured interviews with ERS users. Findings: The proportion of organisms referred for investigation of carbapenem resistance via ERS increased over the first 12 months post-implementation from 35% to 73%; uptake varied widely across regions of England. Completeness of enhanced data fields was poor in 78% of submitted isolates. The median number of days to report confirmatory test results via ERS was 1 day for the regional service and nine days for the national reference laboratory, which additionally conducts phenotypic testing to confirm carbapenemase negativity. Hindrances to ERS utility included: a lack of designated, ongoing resource for system maintenance, technical support and development; uncertainty about how and when to use ERS and workload. Incomplete data prevented gaining a better understanding of important risk factors and transmission routes of CPGNB in England. Conclusion: The ERS is the only surveillance system in England with the potential to gather intelligence on important risk factors for CPGNB to inform public health measures to control their spread. Although the ERS captures more information on CPGNB than other surveillance systems, timeliness and completeness of the enhanced data require substantial improvements in order to deliver the desired health benefits.