Abstract
Abstract
Introduction: Infection prevention and control (IPC) is a systems approach to preventing infections in healthcare organizations. This practice includes all levels of health care, from policy development to medical personnel. It has universal relevance to patient safety and quality of care. With the increasing number of patients and antibiotic resistance, the relevance of IPC increases. WHO has proposed a global strategy in response to these challenges. Ineffective infection prevention measures in health care settings are a major factor in increasing antimicrobial resistance and health care-associated infections. However, there is potential to prevent a significant proportion of such infections, which is supported by the development of a WHO global strategy for strategies to reduce their spread. The aim of this study is to analyze, identify the main aspects of IPC monitoring and evaluation, and discuss the results and their importance in modern medical practice. Materials and methods. Monitoring and evaluation of IPC was carried out in the city of Bishkek and Chui region from 10/10/2023 to 11/06/2023 using the direct observation method. The assessment was carried out using a developed assessment checklist for hospitals and primary care. Statistical data processing was performed in MS office Excel 365, including methods of statistical observation, correlation and regression analysis. Results and discussion. The results of the assessment of IPC in the city of Bishkek and the Chui region revealed high efficiency in a number of components. The highest performance criteria were achieved in the following components: “Safety of medical procedures” (84.9%), “Medical waste management” (82.4%), “Central sterilization department” (77.5%), “Hospital hygiene” (76.2%). Average effectiveness of measures in administrative support (66.5%), isolation system (60.2%), and baseline (25-50)% in health staff training (26%) and surveillance (33.5%). These results highlighted the need to improve thetraining of health care personnel and the surveillance of HCAI. Conclusion. Moderate levels of effectiveness were found in administrative support (66.5%) and isolation systems (60.2%), as well as low effectiveness in training of medical personnel (26%) and in epidemiological surveillance (33.5%) for HCAI. This indicates the need to include more development activities in PH plans. Recommendations include improving administrative support, isolation systems, strengthening training of health personnel and improving surveillance of HCAIs.