BACKGROUND:Infection prevention and control (IPC) programs are critical to the wellbeing of older people in residential aged care homes (RACHs). There is a need to collate global evidence on governance and IPC programs in RACHs. AIM:To synthesise evidence characterizing the elements of IPC and governance of RACHs. METHODS:This scoping review examined literature from electronic bibliographic databases and gray literature using citation chaining and manual searching limited to English language and from 1980 to 2025. Studies were screened against eligibility criteria, and data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and content analysis. RESULTS:75 articles were included. Key components of IPC included standard precautions, employee health, surveillance, staff education, resident care, and outbreak management. Key components of infection control governance were varied but included appointment of an infection control professional and committee. Narrative-style reviews and surveys were most common among peer-reviewed articles, while practical guides and manuals were most common in the gray literature. CONCLUSION:Evidence published over the last 45 years on governance and elements of IPC programs in RACHs is sparse and heterogenous in scope and quality. IMPACT:This synthesis of evidence on the elements and governance of IPC programs in RACHs demonstrates an evidence-practice gap for future research.

BACKGROUND:Healthcare-associated infections are a major health issue for older adults in residential aged care homes (RACHs). Events like the COVID-19 pandemic have increased focus on the practice of infection prevention and control professionals (ICPs) in RACHs. AIM:To synthesise evidence on practice requirements and competency standards for ICPs in RACHs globally. METHODS:This scoping review examined literature from electronic bibliographic databases and gray literature via citation chaining and manual searching limited to English from 1980 to 2025. Studies were screened against eligibility criteria. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and framework analysis. RESULTS:Forty-nine articles were included. Key practice requirements in the white literature included surveillance, staff education, resident care, and employee health; and directing IPC activities, standard precautions, and resident care in the gray literature. Training and credentialing featured less frequently, identifying a need for specialized training. Only 2 formal competency certifications were noted as a requirement or expectation for ICPs. CONCLUSION:Several key elements of practice have been identified, but there is limited detail and consistency regarding qualifications, competency standards, and credentialing. IMPACT:This work reviewed the literature regarding ICP practice requirements, qualifications, and credentialing. Gaps in this literature indicate a need for formal, evidence-based guidelines for ICPs in RACHs.

BACKGROUND:Environmental cleaning and disinfection are central components of infection prevention and control in hospital settings. Disinfectants are chemical agents designed to kill or inactivate microorganisms, including bacteria, viruses, fungi, and spores. The term 'residual activity' has increasingly been associated with disinfectants in recent years, describing a product's ability to have a materially sustained antimicrobial effectiveness over time. METHODS:A desktop review of current Australian policies, standards, and guidelines was completed to catalogue references and recommendations pertaining to the use of disinfectants with residual activity claims for the purpose of environmental cleaning and disinfection in hospital settings. RESULTS:The review revealed a paucity of regulatory guidance and recommendation at both national and jurisdictional levels in Australia with respect to the use of disinfectants with residual activity claims. CONCLUSION:Despite the growing prevalence of such claims, there is no contemporary infection prevention and control guidance in Australia relevant to disinfectants and claims of residual activity. There is no current regulatory guidance supporting the use of disinfectants with residual activity in substitute of established cleaning and disinfection practices in hospital and health service settings. Further implications for infection prevention and control practice are discussed.

Healthcare-associated infections (HAI) are the most frequent hospital-acquired complication, resulting in significant mortality, disability, and system-level costs in Australian hospitals. Many HAIs can be prevented with appropriate infection prevention and control (IPC) measures, including IPC programs led by infection control professionals (ICPs). Despite recent improvements in hospital IPC practices in Australia, such as the introduction of National Safety and Quality Health Service (NSQHS) Standards for hospital accreditation, there are currently no evidence-based minimum standards for the content, composition, and governance of IPC programs, nor the identification of their core elements. Furthermore, there is a similar lack of evidence-based minimum standards guiding the practice requirements, skills, and competencies of hospital ICPs. This protocol outlines a sequential three-phase research design to establish the core requirements for the elements and governance of IPC programs, as well as minimum practice standards for ICPs in Australian hospitals. Phase 1 will involve two integrative reviews to synthesise the elements and governance systems of international IPC programs, and the competencies, education and practice standards for hospital ICPs globally. Phase 2 will use survey and interview methodologies to examine the current content and structure of IPC programs and governance systems in Australian hospitals, as well as the academic and professional content of IPC education and training courses for ICPs in Australia. In Phase 3, a modified electronic Delphi study will be conducted to generate expert consensus on the core requirements of Australian hospital IPC programs and systems of governance, and the professional practice, qualifications and competencies for Australian ICPs. The outcomes of Phase 3 will form the basis for the development of new standards that aim to equip the Australian acute care sector to deliver evidence-based IPC practices, education, resources, and governance.

The COVID-19 pandemic elucidated the importance of infection prevention and control (IPC) in residential aged care homes (RACHs), both on the health and wellbeing of its residents, and the staff and clinicians who care for them. While considerable efforts have been made in Australia to improve IPC both during and in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic, many of these resources remain reliant on evidence originating from hospitals and acute healthcare settings. This research aims to establish the core minimum components that will populate standards for IPC programs and governance (Stream A) and for professional practice and competencies (Stream B) in RACHs. This research will be completed using a sequential three-phase design. In Phase 1, two integrative literature reviews will be completed to synthesise the elements of current global IPC programs and professional competencies in RACHs. In Phase 2, a qualitative analysis of IPC programs and professional practice in Australian RACHs using a combination of surveys and interviews will be completed. Finally, in Phase 3, an e-Delphi will be conducted to collate expert opinion and generate consensus on the minimum components of the IPC program and professionals who administer them in RACHs. The final standards and resources will be collaboratively designed with aged care partners, industry leaders, professional bodies and key Australian health policymakers. These standards seek to empower IPC and aged care staff, not only by ensuring that they are well-equipped with the knowledge and skills to implement effective IPC programs themselves, but also that the organisation is adequately prepared to provide the resources and governance systems.

Infection prevention and control programs are vital to ensuring the health and wellbeing of healthcare consumers and staff. Infection control professionals who lead these programs are uniquely positioned with the knowledge, skills and attributes to direct effective infection control practices and policies within their healthcare setting. As with many specialisations, these individuals may choose to undertake a credentialling process, where their expertise and competence are evaluated and formally recognised by a professional body. Globally, there is growing evidence that credentialling improves the standard of practice of infection control professionals, and achieves beneficial outcomes for staff, patients and the broader healthcare systems in which they operate. In Australia, credentialling is a relatively new endeavour emerging in the mid 1990s with the rapidly evolving profile of the infection control professional. In this paper, we detail the history and evolution of credentialling of the infection control professionals in Australia. We also appraise the current three-tier credentialling framework, including its underlying philosophy, how it distinguishes between ‘competence’ and ‘capability’, the mechanisms it provides for career development, and its adaptation in response to critical contemporary developments in the field of infection control in Australia, including the expanding diversity of contemporary practice.

Background Selection and use of personal protective equipment (PPE) to prevent non-percutaneous body fluid exposure (NP BFE) is determined by a clinical assessment of risk. The aim of this study was to explore the selection and use of PPE, particularly masks and eye protection to prevent NP BFE, by nurses. Methods This quantitative single-site two-phased study was guided by the Health Belief Model (HBM). Phase 1 was a retrospective electronic database audit of body fluid exposure surveillance data. Phase 2 included a cross-sectional survey. Results The highest incidence of reported NP BFE to non-intact skin and mucous membranes during the study period were identified in the emergency department (ED) at 51.3% (20/39), intensive care unit (ICU) at 30.8% (12/39), operating theatre (OT) with 12.9% (5/39), and inpatient renal ward with 5.1% (2/39). Reported PPE use during NP BFE was: 0% face shields or masks, 10% gown/apron, and 15% goggles. Survey results related to Prevention of mucocutaneous exposures were similar across all high-risk units, though ED nurses reported poorer compliance with the use of PPE to prevent exposure. Risk assessment for prevention of NP BFE was reported, yet there was a lack of compliance. The ICU results indicated a positive safety culture in contrast to the ED. Conclusion The findings are consistent with research identifying inadequate prevention of NP BFE, although nurses are aware of the importance of risk assessment. The HBM has the potential to increase understanding of the differences in nurses' perceptions of risk in safety culture.

Background The successful adoption and application of infection prevention and control (IPC) principles in all healthcare settings is dependent on the degree to which healthcare workers (HCWs) are aware of the requirements, have access to program resources and information, and engage with the IPC program. This study investigates the impact of redesigning the Infection Control Department (ICD) intranet site based on user feedback followed by a targeted marketing campaign to improve website usability, awareness, and access. Methods In this systematic study, we used a survey plus two focus group interviews to elicit user requirements for the content and look of the ICD intranet page and identify the best communication platforms to use for the marketing campaign to launch the redesigned intranet page. The information was used to redesign the intranet page and develop the marketing campaign. The survey was repeated post-intervention and these results, along with a comparison of website analytics monitoring traffic, were used to determine the success of the intervention. Results The ICD intranet page redesign increased the information and resources. Post-intervention survey results demonstrated a significant improvement in user satisfaction including ease of navigation and access to IPC information and resources. The marketing campaign resulted in a significant increase in website traffic to the ICD intranet page, demonstrating enhanced engagement with HCWs. Conclusion This study demonstrated that website redesign based on user feedback, combined with a marketing campaign, can increase the traffic to the website and improve the user experience when accessing and navigating the site making the information and resources more accessible to HCWs.

Introduction: COVID-19 has placed unprecedented demands on infection control practitioners (ICPs) and infectious diseases (ID) physicians to implement effective infection prevention and disease control strategies. This study examined their knowledge, preparedness, and experiences managing COVID-19 in the Australasian healthcare settings. Methods: A cross-sectional study of ICPs and ID physician members of the Australasian College for Infection Prevention and Control (ACIPC) and the Australasian Society for Infectious Diseases (ASID) was conducted. An online, voluntary, and anonymous survey was distributed across membership. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse the data. Open text data were analysed using conventional content analysis methods. Results: A total of 148 survey responses were included in the analysis (103 for ICPs and 45 for ID physicians). The majority of ICPs (78.7%) and ID physicians (77.8%) reported having 'very good' or 'good' level of knowledge of COVID-19. An overwhelming majority of ICPs (96%) and ID physicians (73.3%) reported feeling 'moderately prepared' or 'extremely prepared' for managing COVID-19. A large proportion of ICPs (72%) and ID physicians (64.4%) reported receiving specific training/certification in PPE use, with 88% and 75.5% feeling 'mostly or entirely confident' in using it, respectively. Most ICPs (84.5%) and ID physicians (76.2%) reported having 'considerably' or 'moderately more' work added to their daily duties. Their biggest concerns reported included the uncertainties under a rapidly changing landscape, PPE availability and community's compliance. Conclusion: Harmonised information and adequate education-training are key to successfully managing COVID-19 and other future outbreaks.

Introduction: Healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) are a major patient safety problem and lead to increased morbidity, mortality and excess healthcare expenditure. While surveillance is central to all efforts to control and prevent HAIs, there is no single unified national HAI surveillance system in Australia.Methods: In an attempt to collate the available data on the epidemiology of HAIs in Australia, three types of HAIs were included: (i) proportions of HAI hospital-acquired complication (HAI HAC) in Australian public hospitals (1st July 2017-30th June 2019); (ii) publicly available Australian jurisdictional surveillance data (2017-2019); and (iii) peer-reviewed literature data (1st January 2010-31st August 2019).Results: Proportions of HAI HAC data for each HAI remained stable over 2017-2019, with 75-80% of each HAI occurring in NSW, VIC and QLD. Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia was the only HAI data reported nationally and by all jurisdictions. A benchmark of 2.0 cases/10,000 patient days was established, and in 2018-19 all jurisdictions reported rates below the benchmark. A 2017 systematic review of the burden of HAI in Australian hospitals suggested there were 83,096 HAIs/year in Australia. Two national point prevalence studies of HAI in Australia have been conducted, with latest 2018 study indicating an overall HAI prevalence of patients with a HAI of 9.9%.Conclusion: This is the first attempt to collate the available data regarding the epidemiology of HAIs in Australia. Findings will provide hospitals infection prevention and control units an opportunity to benchmark and evaluate interventions to reduce infections and provide transparency on infection rates in hospitals. Introduction: Healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) are a major patient safety problem and lead to increased morbidity, mortality and excess healthcare expenditure. While surveillance is central to all efforts to control and prevent HAIs, there is no single unified national HAI surveillance system in Australia. Methods: In an attempt to collate the available data on the epidemiology of HAIs in Australia, three types of HAIs were included: (i) proportions of HAI hospital-acquired complication (HAI HAC) in Australian public hospitals (1st July 2017-30th June 2019); (ii) publicly available Australian jurisdictional surveillance data (2017-2019); and (iii) peer-reviewed literature data (1st January 2010-31st August 2019). Results: Proportions of HAI HAC data for each HAI remained stable over 2017-2019, with 75-80% of each HAI occurring in NSW, VIC and QLD. Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia was the only HAI data reported nationally and by all jurisdictions. A benchmark of 2.0 cases/10,000 patient days was established, and in 2018-19 all jurisdictions reported rates below the benchmark. A 2017 systematic review of the burden of HAI in Australian hospitals suggested there were 83,096 HAIs/year in Australia. Two national point prevalence studies of HAI in Australia have been conducted, with latest 2018 study indicating an overall HAI prevalence of patients with a HAI of 9.9%. Conclusion: This is the first attempt to collate the available data regarding the epidemiology of HAIs in Australia. Findings will provide hospitals infection prevention and control units an opportunity to benchmark and evaluate interventions to reduce infections and provide transparency on infection rates in hospitals.

BACKGROUND:On 31 December 2019, the World Health Organization recognised clusters of pneumonia-like cases due to a novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19). COVID-19 became a pandemic 71 days later. AIM:To report the clinical and epidemiological features, laboratory data and outcomes of the first group of 11 returned travellers with COVID-19 in Australia. METHODS:This is a retrospective, multi-centre case series. All patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection were admitted to tertiary referral hospitals in New South Wales, Queensland, Victoria and South Australia. RESULTS:The median age of the patient cohort was 42 years (interquartile range (IQR), 24-53 years) with six men and five women. Eight (72.7%) patients had returned from Wuhan, one from Shenzhen, one from Japan and one from Europe. Possible human-to-human transmission from close family contacts in gatherings overseas occurred in two cases. Symptoms on admission were fever, cough and sore throat (n = 9, 81.8%). Co-morbidities included hypertension (n = 3, 27.3%) and hypercholesterolaemia (n = 2, 18.2%). No patients developed severe acute respiratory distress nor required intensive care unit admission or mechanical ventilation. After a median hospital stay of 14.5 days (IQR, 6.75-21), all patients were discharged. CONCLUSIONS:This is a historical record of the first COVID-19 cases in Australia during the early biocontainment phase of the national response. These findings were invaluable for establishing early inpatient and outpatient COVID-19 models of care and informing the management of COVID-19 over time as the outbreak evolved. Future research should extend this Australian case series to examine global epidemiological variation of this novel infection.

Introduction: Healthcare-associated infections are serious and significant complications present across healthcare services, including residential & aged care facilities (RACFs). Although ensuring high quality personal and clinical care delivered to those residing in these facilities is a high national priority, there is a paucity of evidence about outbreaks, governance and education programs held for healthcare workers within Australian residential aged care facilities. This study aims to examine the scope of practice of infection control practitioners (ICPs) within Australian residential aged care facilities and the types of infection prevention and control education and training delivered.Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted inviting all Australian residential aged care facilities to participate in an online survey.Results: A total of 134 residential aged care facilities completed the survey. The majority (88.1%) reported having a designated Infection Prevention and Control professional responsible for surveillance and educational activities. Hand hygiene (94%), personal protective equipment (PPE) (79.9%) and environmental cleaning (70.1%) were some of the available Infection Prevention and Control programs. The lack of access to Infection Prevention and Control education (69.5%) and lack of Infection Prevention and Control expert advice (67.2%) were also reported by some Residential aged care facilities.Conclusion: Australian RACFs recognise the importance of IPC training programs to manage infection surveillance and outbreaks. Despite considerable activities carried out to increase knowledge on breaking the chain of infection, barriers such as the potential lack of access to specialised advice are significant. More support including formal studies and resources are needed to assist these efforts. Introduction: Healthcare-associated infections are serious and significant complications present across healthcare services, including residential & aged care facilities (RACFs). Although ensuring high quality personal and clinical care delivered to those residing in these facilities is a high national priority, there is a paucity of evidence about outbreaks, governance and education programs held for healthcare workers within Australian residential aged care facilities. This study aims to examine the scope of practice of infection control practitioners (ICPs) within Australian residential aged care facilities and the types of infection prevention and control education and training delivered. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted inviting all Australian residential aged care facilities to participate in an online survey. Results: A total of 134 residential aged care facilities completed the survey. The majority (88.1%) reported having a designated Infection Prevention and Control professional responsible for surveillance and educational activities. Hand hygiene (94%), personal protective equipment (PPE) (79.9%) and environmental cleaning (70.1%) were some of the available Infection Prevention and Control programs. The lack of access to Infection Prevention and Control education (69.5%) and lack of Infection Prevention and Control expert advice (67.2%) were also reported by some Residential aged care facilities. Conclusion: Australian RACFs recognise the importance of IPC training programs to manage infection surveillance and outbreaks. Despite considerable activities carried out to increase knowledge on breaking the chain of infection, barriers such as the potential lack of access to specialised advice are significant. More support including formal studies and resources are needed to assist these efforts.

BackgroundCOVID-19 has placed unprecedented demands on infection control professionals (ICPs) and infectious disease (ID) physicians. This study examined their knowledge, preparedness, and experiences managing COVID-19 in the Australian healthcare settings.MethodsA cross-sectional study of ICPs and ID physician members of the Australasian College for Infection Prevention and Control (ACIPC) and the Australasian Society for Infectious Diseases (ASID) was conducted using an online survey. Descriptive statistics were used to summarise and report data.ResultsA total of 103 survey responses were included in the analysis for ICPs and 45 for ID physicians. A majority of ICPs (78.7%) and ID physicians (77.8%) indicated having 'very good' or 'good' level of knowledge of COVID-19. Almost all ICPs (94.2%) relied on state or territory's department of health websites to source up-to-date information While most ID physicians (84.4%) used scientific literature and journals. A majority of ICPs (96%) and ID physicians (73.3%) reported feeling 'moderately prepared' or 'extremely prepared' for managing COVID-19. Most respondents had received specific training about COVID-19 within their workplace (ICPs: 75%; ID physicians: 66.7%), particularly training/certification in PPE use, which made them feel 'mostly or entirely confident' in using it. Most ICPs (84.5%) and ID physicians (76.2%) reported having 'considerably' or 'moderately more' work added to their daily duties. Their biggest concerns included the uncertainties under a rapidly changing landscape, PPE availability, and the community's compliance.ConclusionHarmonised information, specific COVID-19 training and education, and adequate support for front-line workers are key to successfully managing COVID-19 and other future outbreaks.