From manual to electronic: An evaluation of current data handling systems for surveillance of healthcare-associated infections in Victoria

Introduction: Victorian healthcare associated infection (HAI) surveillance is coordinated by VICNISS Coordinating Centre. We evaluated the degree to which electronic data are used for surveillance, including potential scope for improved efficiencies.Methods: In May 2021, Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) managers were invited to participate in a voluntary, anonymised on-line 46-question survey.Results: Of 136 invitations, there were 77 responses (56.2%). Respondents were mostly from public services (51/77). Bed capacity of surveyed services were ≤100 beds for 51/77, >100 to 500 for 19/77, >500 for 7/77. The mean IPC/FTE was 1.5. Data entry was performed by IPC staff (41/49); FTE for task as proportion of total IPC workload was estimated as ≤20% for 40.3% (31/77), 21-60% for 53.2% (41/77) and >60% for 6.5% (5/77). IPC teams had access to electronic theatre lists in 70.4% (38/54), surgical start/finish times in 49.1% (26/53), and anaesthetic procedure data in 33.3% (18/54), whereas ICU central-line days were available electronically in only 17.3% (9/52). Surveyed staff identified the barriers to expanded use of electronic data systems to support surveillance activities within their service: inability to merge multiple in-house IT systems (15/38), limited IT services (13/38) and unavailability of data in electronic format (13/38).Conclusion: Electronic data systems were available at the majority of surveyed services, although few sites had fully integrated systems to reduce manual data handling for HAI surveillance. Looking ahead, integration of multiple in-house systems appears to be the greatest challenge to implementation of electronic systems to support efficient allocation of IPC resources. Introduction: Victorian healthcare associated infection (HAI) surveillance is coordinated by VICNISS Coordinating Centre. We evaluated the degree to which electronic data are used for surveillance, including potential scope for improved efficiencies. Methods: In May 2021, Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) managers were invited to participate in a voluntary, anonymised on-line 46-question survey. Results: Of 136 invitations, there were 77 responses (56.2%). Respondents were mostly from public services (51/77). Bed capacity of surveyed services were ≤100 beds for 51/77, >100 to 500 for 19/77, >500 for 7/77. The mean IPC/FTE was 1.5. Data entry was performed by IPC staff (41/49); FTE for task as proportion of total IPC workload was estimated as ≤20% for 40.3% (31/77), 21-60% for 53.2% (41/77) and >60% for 6.5% (5/77). IPC teams had access to electronic theatre lists in 70.4% (38/54), surgical start/finish times in 49.1% (26/53), and anaesthetic procedure data in 33.3% (18/54), whereas ICU central-line days were available electronically in only 17.3% (9/52). Surveyed staff identified the barriers to expanded use of electronic data systems to support surveillance activities within their service: inability to merge multiple in-house IT systems (15/38), limited IT services (13/38) and unavailability of data in electronic format (13/38). Conclusion: Electronic data systems were available at the majority of surveyed services, although few sites had fully integrated systems to reduce manual data handling for HAI surveillance. Looking ahead, integration of multiple in-house systems appears to be the greatest challenge to implementation of electronic systems to support efficient allocation of IPC resources.