This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Research article
Esmita Charani
Imperial College London
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5938-1202
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Background
The surgical pathway remains a hard to reach, critical target for antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) and infection prevention and control (IPC). We investigated the drivers for surgical AMS and IPC, across cardiovascular and thoracic surgery (CVTS) and gastrointestinal surgery teams in two academic hospitals in South Africa (SA) and India.
Materials and methods
An ethnographic observational study of IPC and AMS was conducted (July 2018–August 2019), with data gathered from 190 hours of non-participant observations (138 India, 60 SA); face-to-face interviews with patients (6 India, 7 South Africa), and healthcare professionals (HCPs) (44 India, 61 SA); and, in-depth patient case studies (4 India, 2 SA). A grounded theory approach aided by Nvivo 11 software, analyzed the emerging themes. An iterative and recursive process of moving between the coded data and the higher-level themes, ensured saturation of the themes. The multiple modes of enquiry enabled cross-validation and triangulation of findings.
Results
Across surgical pathways, multiple barriers exist impeding effective IPC and AMS practices. The existing, implicit roles of HCPs (including nurses, and senior surgeons) are overlooked as interventions target junior doctors, bypassing the opportunity for integrating care across the surgical team members. Critically, the ownership of decisions remains with the operating surgeons and entrenched hierarchies restrict the integration of other HCPs in IPC and AMS.
Conclusions
IPC and AMS are not integrated in surgery. Identifying the implicit existing HCPs roles in IPC and AMS is critical and will facilitate the development of effective and transparent processes across the surgical team for IPC and AMS. Developing a framework approach that includes nurse leadership, empowering pharmacists and engaging surgical leads is essential for integrated care.
Keywords
antibiotic prescribing, infection control, ethnography, low- and middle-income country, surgery
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
This is a list of supplementary files associated with this preprint. Click to download.
Loading...
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
History
CURRENT STATUS: Posted
Version 1
Posted 21 Sep, 2020
No community comments so far
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
Molecular Epidemiology
Learn more about our company.
This is a preprint, a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Research article
Esmita Charani
Imperial College London
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5938-1202
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
History
CURRENT STATUS: Posted
Version 1
Posted 21 Sep, 2020
No community comments so far
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
Molecular Epidemiology
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Background
The surgical pathway remains a hard to reach, critical target for antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) and infection prevention and control (IPC). We investigated the drivers for surgical AMS and IPC, across cardiovascular and thoracic surgery (CVTS) and gastrointestinal surgery teams in two academic hospitals in South Africa (SA) and India.
Materials and methods
An ethnographic observational study of IPC and AMS was conducted (July 2018–August 2019), with data gathered from 190 hours of non-participant observations (138 India, 60 SA); face-to-face interviews with patients (6 India, 7 South Africa), and healthcare professionals (HCPs) (44 India, 61 SA); and, in-depth patient case studies (4 India, 2 SA). A grounded theory approach aided by Nvivo 11 software, analyzed the emerging themes. An iterative and recursive process of moving between the coded data and the higher-level themes, ensured saturation of the themes. The multiple modes of enquiry enabled cross-validation and triangulation of findings.
Results
Across surgical pathways, multiple barriers exist impeding effective IPC and AMS practices. The existing, implicit roles of HCPs (including nurses, and senior surgeons) are overlooked as interventions target junior doctors, bypassing the opportunity for integrating care across the surgical team members. Critically, the ownership of decisions remains with the operating surgeons and entrenched hierarchies restrict the integration of other HCPs in IPC and AMS.
Conclusions
IPC and AMS are not integrated in surgery. Identifying the implicit existing HCPs roles in IPC and AMS is critical and will facilitate the development of effective and transparent processes across the surgical team for IPC and AMS. Developing a framework approach that includes nurse leadership, empowering pharmacists and engaging surgical leads is essential for integrated care.
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
This is a list of supplementary files associated with this preprint. Click to download.
Loading...