National prevalence survey in Brazil to evaluate the quality of microbiology laboratories: the importance of defining priorities to allocate limited resources

dc.creatorCosta, LB
dc.creatorCardoso, MRA
dc.creatorFerreira, CG
dc.creatorLevy, CE
dc.creatorBorba, HM
dc.creatorSallas, J
dc.creatorSantana, HT
dc.creatorLima, RS
dc.creatorFerraz, LR
dc.creatorReis, JDP
dc.creatorSanti, LQ
dc.creatorLevin, AS
dc.date2013
dc.dateJAN
dc.date2014-07-30T17:04:13Z
dc.date2015-11-26T17:39:57Z
dc.date2014-07-30T17:04:13Z
dc.date2015-11-26T17:39:57Z
dc.date.accessioned2018-03-29T00:21:35Z
dc.date.available2018-03-29T00:21:35Z
dc.identifierRevista Panamericana De Salud Publica-pan American Journal Of Public Health. Pan Amer Health Organization, v. 33, n. 1, n. 73, n. 78, 2013.
dc.identifier1020-4989
dc.identifierWOS:000315338100010
dc.identifierhttp://www.repositorio.unicamp.br/jspui/handle/REPOSIP/63412
dc.identifierhttp://repositorio.unicamp.br/jspui/handle/REPOSIP/63412
dc.identifier.urihttp://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/1286592
dc.descriptionThis report describes a survey of microbiology laboratories (n = 467) serving Brazilian hospitals with = 10 intensive care beds and/or involved in the government health care adverse event reporting system. Coordinators were interviewed and laboratories classified as follows: Level 0 (no minimal functioning conditions-85.4% of laboratories); Level 1 (minimal functioning conditions but inadequate execution of basic routine-6.7%); Level 2 (minimal functioning conditions and adequate execution of basic routine but no adequate procedures for quality control-5.8%); Level 3 (minimal functioning conditions, adequate execution of basic routine, and adequate procedures for quality control, but no direct communication with the infection control department-0.9%); Level 4 (minimal functioning conditions, adequate execution of basic routine, adequate procedures for quality control, and direct communication with infection control, but no available advanced resources-none); and Level 5 (minimal functioning conditions, adequate execution of basic routine, adequate procedures for quality control, direct communication with infection control, and available advanced resources-0.9%). Twelve laboratories did not perform Ziehl-Neelsen staining; 271 did not have safety cabinets; and >30% without safety cabinets had automated systems. Low quality was associated with serving hospitals not participating in government adverse-event program; private hospitals; nonteaching hospitals; and those outside state capitals. Results may reflect what occurs in many other countries where defining priorities is important due to limited resources.
dc.description33
dc.description1
dc.description73
dc.description78
dc.languageen
dc.publisherPan Amer Health Organization
dc.publisherWashington
dc.publisherEUA
dc.relationRevista Panamericana De Salud Publica-pan American Journal Of Public Health
dc.relationRev. Panam. Salud Publica
dc.rightsfechado
dc.sourceWeb of Science
dc.subjectLaboratories, hospital
dc.subjecthealth care surveys
dc.subjectquality assurance, health care
dc.subjectmicrobiological techniques
dc.subjectquality indicators, health care
dc.subjectBrazil
dc.subjectHealth-care
dc.subjectInfections
dc.subjectManagement
dc.titleNational prevalence survey in Brazil to evaluate the quality of microbiology laboratories: the importance of defining priorities to allocate limited resources
dc.typeArtículos de revistas


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución