Rapid and reproducible surveillance for ventilator-associated pneumonia.

Klompas M, Kleinman K, Khan Y, Evans RS, Lloyd JF, Stevenson K, Samore M, Platt R, CDC Prevention Epicenters Program. Rapid and reproducible surveillance for ventilator-associated pneumonia. Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America. 2012 Feb 1; 54(3):370-7.

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information vaww.hsrd.research.va.gov/dimensions/

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.    Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions

Search for Abstract from PubMed

---

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: The complexity and subjectivity of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) surveillance limit its value in assessing and comparing quality of care for ventilated patients. A simpler, more quantitative VAP definition may increase utility. METHODS: We streamlined the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention definition of VAP to increase objectivity and efficiency. Qualitative criteria were replaced with quantitative criteria, and changes in ventilator settings were used to screen patients for worsening oxygenation. We retrospectively compared surveillance time, reproducibility, and outcomes for streamlined versus conventional surveillance among medical and surgical patients on mechanical ventilation in 3 university hospitals. RESULTS: Application of the streamlined definition was faster (mean 3.5 minutes vs 39.0 minutes per patient) and more objective (interrater reliability 0.79 vs 0.45) than the conventional definition. On multivariate analysis, the streamlined definition predicted increases in ventilator days (6.5 days [95% CI, 4.1-10.0] vs 6.4 days [95% CI, 4.7-8.6]), intensive care days (5.6 days [95% CI, 3.2-8.9] vs 6.2 days [95% CI, 4.6-8.2]), and hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.84 [95% CI, 0.31-2.29] vs OR 0.69 [95% CI, 0.30-1.55]) as effectively as conventional surveillance. The conventional definition was a marginally superior predictor of increased hospital days (5.2 days [95% CI, 3.4-7.6] vs 2.1 days [95% CI, -0.5-5.6]). CONCLUSIONS: A streamlined version of the VAP definition was faster, more objective, and predicted patients' outcomes almost as effectively as the conventional definition. VAP surveillance using the streamlined method may facilitate more objective and efficient quality assessment for ventilated patients.