Infection prevention and control programs evaluations: An exploratory comparative study of contemporary tolls

Introduction: The efficacy of comprehensive Infection Prevention and Control Programs (IPCP) to reduce infection rates is well established. However, the evaluation of these programmes to achieve the best performance remains an issue. In this sense, researchers have worked on developing tools for evaluation IPC. Objectives: To compare three existing IPCP evaluation tools applied in healthcare facilities in Brazil. Methods: Cross-sectional, descriptive, quantitative approach, conducted using three tools concurrently. The tools were: 1.Infection Prevention and Control Programme Evaluation (IPCPE) from Australia; 2.Operating Guides of IPCP indicators (OGIPCP) from Brazil; 3.Assessment tool for hospital IPCP (IPCAF) from World Health Organization. Infection control practitioners (ICP) were recruited using snowball technique. Each ICP applied the tools to their setting. Data collection was performed by using a standardized semi-structured questionnaire, including 35 Likert scale items to inform the feasibility and comprehensiveness of tools. Results: Among invited ICP, 12 participants applied all evaluation tools. The average experience in infection prevention was 8 years (range 1.5 to 15 years). The average time to apply the evaluation tools were: IPCPE: 3h, OGIPCP: 1h, and IPCAF 1.5h. The majority of positive agreements regarding comprehensiveness were obtained by IPCPE (100% of positive agreement in 10 questions), followed by IPCAF (100% of positive agreement in 9 questions). Time spent applying the tools was only considered acceptable for OGIPCP and IPCAF. No tool achieved 100% agreement in 10 questions regarding comprehensiveness to assess the support of microbiology and other services to the IPCP, and links with public health. None of the tools achieved 100% agreement to recommend their use in extra-hospital settings such as primary care. Conclusion: Both IPCPE and IPCAF were considered as more comprehensive, but still lacking potential to access all relevant issues for IPCP. IPCAF and OGIPCP were considered less time consuming. Next, we will perform a qualitative approach to better understand the improvement gaps.