Statements in which the resource exists.
SubjectPredicateObjectContext
pubmed-article:2685101rdf:typepubmed:Citationlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0085557lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:2685101lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0205721lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:2685101lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0025663lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:2685101lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C2349187lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:2685101lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C1511790lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:2685101lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0220825lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:2685101lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0021710lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:2685101lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0950580lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:issue11lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:dateCreated1990-1-11lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:abstractTextTo improve the efficiency of nosocomial infection detection, a highly structured system combining initial reporting by the bedside night nurse of symptoms possibly related to infection with follow-up by the infection control nurse (ICN) was developed: The Infection Control Sentinel Sheet System (ICSSS). Between July 1, 1987 and February 28, 1988, a prospective comparison of results obtained through ICSSS and daily bedside observation/chart review by a full-time trained intensivist was undertaken in the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU). Ratios of nosocomial infections and nosocomially-infected patients were 15.8 and 7.0 respectively among 685 admissions; included are seven infections identified only through the ICSSS so that the "gold standard" became an amalgamation of the two systems. The sensitivity for detection of nosocomially-infected patients by bedside observation/chart review and ICSSS was 100% and 87% respectively. The sensitivity for detection of standard infections (blood, wound and urine) was 88% and 85% respectively. The sensitivity for detection of nosocomial infections at all sites was 94% and 72% respectively. Missed infections were minor (e.g., drain, skin, eye), required physician diagnosis (e.g., pneumonia), were not requested on the sentinel sheet (SS) (e.g., otitis media), related to follow-up of deceased patients or were minor misclassifications or failures to associate with device (e.g., central-line related). Daily PICU surveillance by the ICN required only 20 minutes a day. The ICSSS appears highly promising and has many unmeasured benefits.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:languageenglld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:journalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:citationSubsetIMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:statusMEDLINElld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:monthNovlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:issn0899-823Xlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:authorpubmed-author:BarkerGGlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:authorpubmed-author:GoldRRlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:authorpubmed-author:EdmondsJJlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:authorpubmed-author:BohmEElld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:authorpubmed-author:MilnerRRlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:authorpubmed-author:Ford-JonesE...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:authorpubmed-author:PollockEElld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:authorpubmed-author:MindorffC MCMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:issnTypePrintlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:volume10lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:ownerNLMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:authorsCompleteYlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:pagination515-20lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:dateRevised2007-11-15lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:2685101-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:2685101-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:2685101-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:2685101-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:2685101-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:2685101-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:2685101-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:2685101-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:2685101-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:2685101-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:2685101-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:2685101-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:2685101-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:2685101-...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:year1989lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:articleTitleEvaluation of a new method of detection of nosocomial infection in the pediatric intensive care unit: the Infection Control Sentinel Sheet System.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:affiliationDepartment of Pediatrics, Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:2685101pubmed:publicationTypeJournal Articlelld:pubmed