An intranet-based automated system for the surveillance of XXXX : prospective validation compared with physicians' self-reports.

@entity1 @entity1212 @entity23561 @entity2480 @entity580 @entity2259 @entity293
OBJECTIVE: To examine the reliability of the data produced by an automated system for the surveillance of @entity580 . SETTING: A 906-bed, tertiary-care teaching hospital. DESIGN: Three surveillance techniques were concurrently performed in seven high-risk units during an 11-week period: automated surveillance (AS) based on the prospective processing of computerized medical records; @entity2480 ( @entity2480 ) based on the retrospective verification by ward clinicians of weekly reports of positive bacteriologic results; and a @entity23561 ( @entity23561 ) consisting of the infection control team reviewing case records of @entity1 with positive bacteriology results. @entity2259 , @entity293 , and @entity1212 were recorded for all inpatients. The performances (sensitivity, specificity, and time consumption) of AS and @entity2480 were compared with those of @entity23561 . RESULTS: Of 548 positive bacteriology samples included during the study period, 229 (42%) were classified as @entity580 . The overall sensitivity was 91% and 59% for AS and @entity2480 , respectively. The two methods had the same overall specificity value (91%). Kappa measures of agreement were 0.81 and 0.54 for AS and @entity2480 , respectively. AS required less time to collect data (54 seconds per week per unit) compared with @entity2480 (7 minutes and 43 seconds per week per unit) and @entity23561 (37 minutes and 15 seconds per week per unit). CONCLUSION: Our results confirm that the retrospective review of charts and laboratory data by physicians lacks sensitivity for the surveillance of @entity580 . The intranet-based automated method developed for this purpose was more accurate and less time-consuming than the weekly, retrospective @entity2480 method.
