Time Spent by Infection Control Professionals Undertaking Healthcare Associated Infection Surveillance: A Multi-centred Cross Sectional Study

Author Faculty (Discipline)


Document Type


Publication Date


Publication Details

This article was originally published as:

Mitchell, B. G., Hall, L., Halton, K., MacBeth, D., & Gardner, A. (2016). Time spent by infection control professionals undertaking healthcare associated infection surveillance: A multi-centred cross sectional study. Infection, Disease and Health, 21(1), 36-40. doi: 10.1016/j.idh.2016.03.003

ISSN: 2468-0451


060502 Infectious Agents| 111003 Clinical Nursing: Secondary (Acute Care)| 111706 Epidemiology| 111716 Preventive Medicine| 111799 Public Health and Health Services not elsewhere classified

Avondale Research Centre

Lifestyle Research Centre

Reportable Items



Background: There is limited contemporary information on how infection control professionals (ICPs) in hospitals utilise their time, with even less providing any specific data on time taken to undertake HAI surveillance. HAI surveillance is a critical component of any infection control program.

Methods: An anonymous online web-based survey was used to conduct a cross-sectional study of infection control units in public and private Australian hospitals. Participants were asked demographic information and time spent undertaking infection control activities, including surveillance.

Results: Forty infection control units, responsible for providing services to 138 hospitals completed the survey. The percentage of time spent undertaking HAI surveillance activities by members of the infection control units was 1675 h or 36.0% (95% CI 34.3%e37.8%; range 17%e61%) of all contracted infection control professionals time (4653 h). Of the time spent undertaking HAI surveillance, 56% was spent collecting data, 27% collecting data on compliance with infection control activities and 17% feeding HAI data back to clinician and management. There was no difference in the proportion of time spent undertaking HAI surveillance between public and privately funded hospitals or infection control units led by a credentialed ICP. Infection control units with a form of electronic surveillance dedicated more time to surveillance, compared to units that did not use such a system. Demands for surveillance increased with larger number of hospitals beds.

Conclusion: The costs of undertakingHAI surveillance and collectingdata can be considerable.The efficiency ofundertaking surveillance should be considered, weighing investment against the likely improvement in infection rates and patient quality of life.


Due to copyright restrictions this article is unavailable for download.

This article may be accessed from the publisher here.

Please refer to publisher version or contact the library.