Skip directly to site content Skip directly to page options Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link
Volume 10, Number 9—September 2004
Research

Computer Algorithms To Detect Bloodstream Infections

William E. Trick*Comments to Author , Brandon M. Zagorski†, Jerome I. Tokars*, Michael O. Vernon†, Sharon F. Welbel†‡§, Mary F. Wisniewski†‡, Chesley Richards*, and Robert A. Weinstein†‡§
Author affiliations: *Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA; †Chicago Antimicrobial Resistance Project, Chicago, Illinois, USA; ‡Cook County Hospital, Chicago, Illinois, USA; §Rush Medical College, Chicago, Illinois, USA

Main Article

Figure 4

Comparison of the hospital-acquired, primary, central-venous catheter (CVC)–associated bloodstream infection (BSI) rate for adult patient–care units determined by two separate manual methods (i.e., infection control professional [ICP] and investigator review), by positive blood culture plus manual CVC determination, and by computer algorithm, Cook County Hospital, September 1, 2001–February 28, 2002, Chicago, Illinois. The number of hospital-acquired, primary, CVC-associated bloodstream infectio

Figure 4. Comparison of the hospital-acquired, primary, central-venous catheter (CVC)–associated bloodstream infection (BSI) rate for adult patient–care units determined by two separate manual methods (i.e., infection control professional [ICP] and investigator review), by positive blood culture plus manual CVC determination, and by computer algorithm, Cook County Hospital, September 1, 2001–February 28, 2002, Chicago, Illinois. The number of hospital-acquired, primary, CVC-associated bloodstream infections determined by investigator review is displayed in parentheses. Correlation coefficient (r) and p value for comparisons between investigator review and each method were as follows: infection control professional review r = 0.95, p = 0.001; blood culture + central line determination r = 0.90, p = 0.006; computer algorithm r = 0.91, p = 0.004. ICU, intensive-care unit.

Main Article

Page created: March 25, 2011
Page updated: March 25, 2011
Page reviewed: March 25, 2011
The conclusions, findings, and opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.
file_external