A recent study conducted at Boston Children’s Hospital shows significant staffing gaps in pediatric infection prevention. The research, published in the American Journal of Infection Control (AJIC), indicates the urgent need for updated methodologies tailored to meet the evolving demands of modern health care systems. Infection preventionists (IPs) at Boston Children’s Hospital underscored that traditional formulas for calculating the number of required staff fail to meet current and region-specific health care needs, specifically those of pediatric patients.
Lindsay K. Weir, lead infection preventionist at Boston Children’s Hospital and lead author of the study, enlightened on the driving force behind the study, which largely stemmed from the institution’s rapid expansion and the pressing concern over adequately supporting the new spaces. This concern is rooted in the fact that the orthodox staffing models take into account only inpatient beds, which might prove insufficient with the hospital’s growth.
Protracted on the paired complexities of adequately staffing IPs and expanding their roles beyond direct Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) activities, the study also integrates a 2020 survey by the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology (APIC). With merely 14% of the respondents having infection prevention as their primary focus, a majority were also found managing peripheral duties involving quality improvement, education, and regulatory compliance along with their core IPC responsibilities. Cumulatively, this paints a nuanced picture of the evolving demands facing IPs and the consequential strains on the present staffing models.
Rethinking traditional methods of calculating IP staff, the study also underlines the essential trends in health care, like the surge in outpatient procedures, the shortening of hospital stays, and the increasing focus on ambulatory services, which are overlooked by the current systems. Consequently, the research posits that the need for IP staff will largely surpass the ones estimated through inpatient-bed-only calculations.
Furthermore, the study reveals that with the addition of more full-time equivalent staff, the frequency of routine rounds in clinics can be increased from quarterly to monthly. This will allow the clinics more face-to-face consultations and help the IPs in addressing any regulatory gaps, thus propelling quality improvement efforts. It will also facilitate staff development and further enhance professional relationships. The current scenario offers an opportunity to reassess staffing models and ensure that proper resources are allocated to the critical role of infection prevention.