R. Mertens et al., INTERNATIONAL COMPARISON OF RESULTS OF INFECTION SURVEILLANCE - THE NETHERLANDS VERSUS BELGIUM, Infection control and hospital epidemiology, 15(9), 1994, pp. 574-580
OBJECTIVE: To explore the potential benefit of comparing results from
two national surveillance networks. DESIGN: Two prospective multicente
r cohort studies of surgical wound infections (SWI). SETTING: Thirty-f
ive and 62 acute-care hospitals in The Netherlands (NL) and Belgium (B
), respectively, from October 1, 1991, to June 30, 1992. RESULTS: The
participation was equivalent in the two countries: 27% (NL) and 28% (B
) of all acute-care hospitals. Marked differences emerged between the
Dutch and Belgian crude infection rates and the specific rates by woun
d class and other risk factors. Because the case-mix in the countries
is quite different, comparisons can be made only by specific surgical
category. The results for inguinal hernia repair and for appendectomy
are compared as an example. In herniorrhaphies, the difference in infe
ction rate (0.4% [NL] versus 1.2% [B]) is not explained by differences
in the distribution of risk factors. The shorter hospital stay in The
Netherlands (4 days [NL] versus 6 days [B]), the more effective postd
ischarge surveillance in Belgium, and the fact that more than two thir
ds of the detected infections occurred after the first postoperative w
eek probably can account for most of the difference. There was a strik
ing difference in prophylaxis use (3.7% [NL] versus 41.9% [B]). In app
endectomies, the Dutch patient population shows on average a higher ri
sk profile, and surgery is urgent much more often in The Netherlands (
78.3%) than in Belgium (49.2%). The infection rate is higher in The Ne
therlands, especially among the patients without prophylaxis, which ag
ain is employed less frequently there. CONCLUSION: We conclude that in
ternational comparisons yield interesting insights regarding quality o
f care, reaching beyond the field of nosocomial infection prevention.
This is an argument in favor of more harmonization between surveillanc
e networks (Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1994;15:574-580).