Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (40)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by HALEY, R. W.
Right arrow Articles by HOOTON, T. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by HALEY, R. W.
Right arrow Articles by HOOTON, T. M.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

American Journal of Epidemiology Vol. 121, No. 2: 168-181
Copyright © 1985 by The Johns Hopkins University School of Hygiene and Public Health


research-article

INCREASED RECOGNITION OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES IN US HOSPITALS THROUGH INCREASED USE OF DIAGNOSTIC TESTS, 1970–1976

ROBERT W. HALEY1 2, DAVID H. CULVER1, W. MEADE MORGAN1, JOHN W. WHITE1, T. GRACE EMORI1 and THOMAS M. HOOTON1 3

1Hospital Infections Program, Center for Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control, Public Health Service, US Department of Health and Human Services Atlanta, GA

Address for reprints: SENIC Project, incare Public Inquiries Office, Centers for Disease Control, Atlanta, GA 30333

To assess the influence of physicians' diagnostic practices on the recognition of nosocomial infections, the authors analyzed data collected on 339,044 patients selected randomly from admissions in 1970 and 1975–1976 to 338 randomly selected hospitals representative of all acute-care US hospitals. Eight rates representing the frequency of cuftures or chest x-rays among patients with or without signs of infection were calculated. These varied widely among hospitals, were highest in teaching hospitals and in the Northeast, but increased more among small hospitals and in the South and West. Rates of performing urine cuftures and reporting colony counts were highly correlated with observed rates of nosocomial urinary tract infection. Analogous measures were moderately correlated with observed bacteremia rates and pneumonia rates but were only weakly associated with surgical wound infection rates. These data indicate that the nationwide increase in the use of these diagnostic tests increased the recognition of infectious diseases in US hospitals.

cost control; costs and cost analysis; cross infection; diagnosis; diagnosis, laboratory; health services research; infection


2Current address:Division of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Southwestern Medical School, University of Texas Health Science Center at Dallas, 5323 Harry Hines Boulevard, Dallas, TX

3Current address: Department of Internal Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Harborview Medical Center, 6010 43rd Street, NE, Seattle, WA


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Arch SurgHome page
M. M. Olson and J. T. Lee Jr
Continuous, 10-Year Wound Infection Surveillance: Results, Advantages, and Unanswered Questions
Arch Surg, June 1, 1990; 125(6): 794 - 803.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
JAMAHome page
Increase in National Hospital Discharge Survey Rates for Septicemia-- United States, 1979-1987
JAMA, February 16, 1990; 263(7): 937 - 938.
[PDF]


Home page
Arch Intern MedHome page
W. SHAKESPEARE and D. G. MAKI
Risk Factors for Nosocomial Infection in Intensive Care: 'Devices vs Nature' and Goals for the Next Decade
Arch Intern Med, January 1, 1989; 149(1): 30 - 35.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Arch SurgHome page
R. E. Condon, R. W. Haley, J. T. Lee Jr, and J. L. Meakins
Does Infection Control Control Infection?
Arch Surg, February 1, 1988; 123(2): 250 - 256.
[Abstract] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.