Skip to main content
Download PDF

Effectiveness of inspector mechanism for the emergency infection prevention and control in the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic period: a self-control real-word study

BMC Infectious Diseases volume 23, Article number: 858 (2023) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

To ensure emergency infection prevention and control (IPC) can be fully supervised and monitored in coronavirus disease (COVID-19) epidemic period, a three-level inspector mechanism called "Internal self-check, Departmental cross-check, and Verification of outstanding key and difficult issues" was established in southwest China. The present study aimed to explore the effectiveness of inspector mechanism for the emergency IPC.

Methods

A self-control real-world study was conducted during COVID-19 epidemic period from 2020 to 2022. An innovative designed mobile phone application was used to realize paperless information transmission and data management. Data were compared between inspection levels using SPSS 19.0 software.

Results

A total of 2,800,132 supervision records were collected, including 149,137 comprehensive epidemic IPC projects, 1,410,093 personal protective equipment (PPE) use, 1,223,595 wearing and removing process of PPE and 17,307 ultraviolet light-detectable fluorescent (UV/F) surface marker. During the study period, the inspectors and subjects explored many optimized IPC measures. The compliance rate of check items has exceeded 98%, and internal self-check has a statistically significant higher rate than departmental cross-check (99.95% versus 98.74%, χ2 = 26111.479, P < 0.001). Compare with the failure rate in internal self check, the failure rate of PPE usage and wearing/removing process was statistically higher in departmental cross-check (χ2 = 1957.987, P < 0.001, χ2 = 465.610, P < 0.001, respectively). The overall clearance rate of UV/F surface markers is 87.88%, but there is no statistically significant difference over the three years of the present study (F = 2.902, P = 0.071).

Conclusions

Inspector mechanism for the emergency IPC completed an incredible inspection workload and offered creative assistance to combat the COVID-19 outbreak. These methods and accumulated experiences should be helpful for us to strengthen IPC for future epidemic.

Peer Review reports

Background

The global pandemic of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) created a public health crisis in many countries which was caused by the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) [1, 2]. From 2020 to 2022, the COVID-19 epidemic has changed the world dramatically due to multiple epidemic peaks of mutant variants such as Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta and Omicron [3]. At the time of this writing, there have been 767,750,853 confirmed cases of COVID-19, including 6,941,095 deaths, reported to World Health Organization (WHO) [4]. In the wake of so much loss, there is an opportunity to maintain gains made during the COVID-19 epidemic and strengthen the infection prevention and control (IPC) for future epidemic and pandemic response efforts [5, 6]. However, with COVID-19 over as a global health emergency declared by WHO on May 5, 2023, many tested excellent IPC strategies may face the risk of being unconsciously abandoned or forgotten, such as inspector mechanism [7].

The inspector mechanism, as a reasonable supervision and management strategy, has demonstrated various forms and connotations around the world during the COVID-19 crisis [8]. Personal protective equipment (PPE) related inspector mechanism was most commonly structured to monitor or optimize PPE utilization, such as “PPE Spotters” in Chicago and “PPE police” in Kuwait [9, 10]. In some special scenarios, the inspector mechanism has been extensively used in various aspects related to IPC. A learning-practice-examination-supervision model practiced in Shanghai's Fangcang shelter hospitals has shown an excellent protective effect of infection control for third-party personnel [8]. In negative pressure isolation wards of Guangdong Second Provincial General Hospital, an observing system was established to maintain the normal operation of wards, supervise the implementation of disinfection and ensure a PPE sufficient supply [11]. Of note, the inspector mechanism became a nationally recommended strategy after the observing system in Guangdong Province was recognized by the Health and Family Planning Commission of China (FPCC). We performed a three-level inspector mechanism in such occasion to supervise and inspect the strengthened measures on the basis of daily IPC, so as to avoid healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) caused by COVID-19 [12, 13]. As the shortage of full-time staff in HAI management is common in China's tertiary hospitals [14], such as Sichuan Provincial People's Hospital which has 4,130 beds, 5,480 in-service medical workers and more than 1,300 intern students, but only 12 full-time HAI management staff, we attempted to recruit more part-time staff to establish an enforcement strategy through the three-level inspector mechanism to make strong supervision and monitoring for the emergency IPC of COVID-19. In the present study, we performed a self-control real-word study to explore the effectiveness of inspector mechanism for the emergency IPC in COVID-19 epidemic period from 2020 to 2022.

Material and methods

Study design

A real-world study was conducted in Sichuan Academy of Medical Sciences, Sichuan People's Hospital, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, a tertiary care teaching hospital in Chengdu in the region of Sichuan (Western China). The informed consent was waived by the local ethics committee as it was an observational study.

All 116 departments and units of the hospital were included in this intervention study, including 9 intensive care units (ICUs), 74 general clinical departments, 17 outpatient and emergency units, 9 medical technology departments and 7 auxiliary departments. SM Table S1 in the Supplement presents the details of intervention units.

Study protocol

A three-level inspector mechanism, called "Internal self-check, Departmental cross-check, and Verification of outstanding key and difficult issues" (Fig. 1), was established in March 2020, with the vice-president of the hospital as the team leader, to make up for the lack of full-time HAI management staff, and to ensure each emergency IPC measures can be fully supervised and monitored. The emergency IPC, matched with the COVID-19 emergency response, is based on the Guidelines for the COVID-19 IPC in medical institutions issued by the National Health Commission, including the emergency plan and workflow, training, emergency isolation ward, cleaning and disinfection, nucleic acid sampling, medical staff protection, pre-inspection triage, strict hand hygiene, medical waste disposal, medical fabric disposal, strict management of accompanying and visiting, boiling water room management and self-symptoms and nucleic acid monitoring [15,16,17].

Fig. 1
figure 1

The part-time inspector system for COVID-19 prevention and control. This system includes Internal self-examination, Departmental cross-examination, and Verification of outstanding key and difficult issues

Full size image

The regulations and implementation rules of inspector mechanism, signed by the hospital legal representative, documents the system's organizational framework, responsibilities, guarantee, implementation, coordination and operational details, and places special emphasis on the personal interests of inspectors, including ① the heads of each department should provide inspectors with half a day off routine work per week to complete the inspection tasks full-time; ② allowances are supplemented by the Operations Department of hospital based on monthly inspection workload; ③ provide inspectors with the opportunity to receive annual follow-up training related to IPC and participate in emergency drills.

Level I (Internal self-check) consists of 116 self-inspectors. At least one self-inspector was recruited by the HAI management department for each clinical, medical technology or administrative security department. There were a total of 3 supervision forms that need to be completed within one week, covering the development of emergency plans, nucleic acid screening of patients and their escorts at the time of admission, the health Quick Response (QR) code management of escort and visit, the management of infectious disease reports, the management of ward access, the strengthening management of clean areas in wards, HAI prevention and control, the PPE management, training management and logistics support management. The inspection frequency was once a day. The developed mobile phone application (APP) was used to upload the inspection results within one week.

Level II (Departmental cross-check) consists of 63 cross-departmental inspectors. Inspectors at this level were uniformly recruited by the HAI Management Committee and publicized throughout the hospital. The inspection content included the implementation of the emergency measures and the inspection status of the level 1 self-inspector. The inspection objects and items were temporarily released by the HAI management department at the beginning of each month. The inspection frequency was once a week. The cross-departmental inspectors used the developed mobile phone APP to upload the results and immediately feedback to the person in charge of the relevant department the problems found during the cross-inspection process. In addition, ultraviolet light-detectable fluorescent (UV/F) surface marker was included as a mandatory monthly completion project, and artificial intelligence (AI) judgment system based on computer vision was used to calculate the clearance rate. This system operation diagram was shown in Fig. 2, and its intelligent judgment logic was as follows: ① calculate the dot matrix of UV/F brightness pixels through image enhancement, inversion, and binarization processing; ② AI algorithm automatically determine the UV/F clearance rate before and after cleaning, and ultimately generate the rate for each area.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Schematic diagram of artificial intelligence determination of UV/F clearance rate. This artificial intelligence judgment system automatically determine the UV/F clearance rate before and after cleaning

Full size image

Level III (Verification of outstanding key and difficult issues) consists 12 full-time HAI management staff. The inspection task at this level was to focus on the key and difficult points found in the self- and cross-inspection. The inspectors organized a special team and concentrate resources to solve the problem, and reported the results to the HAI Management Committee.

Criteria for the selection of inspectors

Both the self- and cross-inspector needed to have some experience in the HAI management to ensure that he/she was able to perform a real supervisory role. In order to enable the inspectors to accurately understand the terms of each inspection, we have provided a corresponding instructional video for each inspection list in the mobile phone APP. Otherwise, given the basic training would be time-consuming [18, 19], the recruited inspectors must meet the following criteria: Internal self-checker must be a member of the daily IPC group, have at least 2 years of clinical experience, and completed the training and assessment for Level I. In addition, an appointed and signed by department leaders for confirmation were wanted. Ultimately 116 self-checkers were included for filing. Departmental cross-checker must be a member of the daily IPC group, have at least 5 years of clinical experience, and completed the training and assessment for Level II. Furthermore, in special departments such as ICU and fever clinics, inspectors must be served by at least one doctor. After screening, 54 cross-checkers were awarded certificates and announced throughout the hospital.

Definitions and outcomes

Primary outcomes were the execution of the three-level inspector mechanism and compliance with various IPC measures, consisting of PPE compliance of medical personnel, clearance rate of UV/F surface markers and compliance with comprehensive epidemic IPC projects.

According to the Personal Protection Guidelines of Specific Groups during COVID-19 Epidemic, PPE compliance of medical personnel was defined as “PPE usage” and “Wearing and removing process of PPE” [20]. PPE usage was mainly checked for insufficient PPE usage or excessive PPE usage, while wearing and removing process of PPE was to verify whether medical personnel have made the following step errors related to PPE donning/doffing: ① incorrect steps for mask donning; ② incorrect steps for mask doffing; ③ incorrect steps for isolation clothes donning; ④ incorrect steps for isolation clothes doffing; ⑤ incorrect steps for medical protective clothes donning; ⑥ incorrect steps for medical protective clothes doffing; ⑦ incorrect steps for the sequence of PPE donning; ⑧ incorrect steps for the sequence of PPE doffing; ⑨ Hand hygiene was not implemented during the PPE donning/doffing.

Clearance rate of UV/F surface markers involves UV light-visible markers (clinell, GAMMA) on surfaces before terminal cleaning, with assessment post-cleaning of any remaining marks.

According to the technical guidelines for the emergency IPC during COVID-19 epidemic, comprehensive epidemic IPC projects involves department management, cleaning/disinfection, ward management, medical staff protection, medical waste disposal, medical fabric disposal, accompanying and boiling water room management [15,16,17].

Data collection

An independent mobile phone APP called “Star of IPC”, which were developed by the healthcare-associated infections quality control center in Sichuan province, were used to realize paperless information transmission and data management. Each inspector in this system was granted an account and privileges that match their inspection level.

Statistical analysis

Statistical analysis of the data was performed using SPSS 19.0 software. Data were presented as mean [standard deviation (SD)] or frequency [corresponding proportion (%)], for normally continuous and categorical variables respectively. Using one-way ANOVA for continuous variables and the χ2 test for categorical variables, data were compared between inspection levels. All tests were 2-sided with an  α level of 0.05.

Results

During the present study period, there were already 2,800,132 supervision records on our dedicated mobile phone APP, including 149,137 comprehensive epidemic IPC projects, 1,410,093 PPE use, 1,223,595 wearing and removing process of PPE and 17,307 UV/F surface markers.

The inspection results of comprehensive epidemic IPC projects are shown in Table 1. The compliance rate of check items has exceeded 98%, and internal self-check has a statistically significant higher rate than departmental cross-check (99.95% versus 98.74%, χ2 = 26111.479, P < 0.001). During the study period, the inspectors and subjects explored many optimized IPC measures, such as warning signs of emergency isolation ward (Fig. 3A) and negative pressure chamber prepared for C-13 urea exhaled gas test (Fig. 3B).

Table 1 Inspection results of comprehensive epidemic IPC projects
Full size table
Fig. 3
figure 3

Optimized IPC measures explored by the inspectors and subjects. A Warning signs of emergency isolation ward include four contents as follows: ① Emergency isolation ward, ② Please do not enter for patients and their families who are not staying in this room, ③ Entry and exit irrelevant personnel are prohibited, ④ Close the door after you, please; B Each independent exhalation chamber can accommodate one person for C-13 urea exhaled gas test. The exhaust system installed on the roof ensures that the exhalation chamber is at a relative negative pressure. These designs have avoided virus transmission due to possible aerosols

Full size image

94% of all inspection records are contributed by relevant PPE, as show in Table 2. The failure rate of PPE usage was statistically higher in departmental cross-check than in internal self-check (4.17% versus 0.70%, χ2 = 1957.987, P < 0.001). The failure rate of PPE wearing and removing process was statistically higher in departmental cross-check than in internal self-check (2.48% versus 0.64, χ2 = 465. 610, P < 0.001). Of note, these failure rates show a decreasing trend year by year in both self-check and cross-check (χ2 = 1476.114, P < 0.001, χ2 = 1098.832, P < 0.001, χ2 = 86.565, P < 0.001, χ2 = 50.620, P < 0.001, respectively). Figure 4 shows the details.

Table 2 Inspection results of PPE related
Full size table
Fig. 4
figure 4

Failure rates show a decreasing trend year by year in both self-check and cross-check. A The failure rate of PPE usage was higher in departmental cross-check than in internal self-check; B The failure rate of PPE wearing and removing process was higher in departmental cross-check than in internal self-check

Full size image

The overall clearance rate of UV/F surface markers is 87.88%. As shown in Table 3, there was no statistically significant difference in clearance rate of UV/F surface markers over the three years of the present study (F = 2.902, P = 0.071).

Table 3 Clearance rate of UV/F surface markers
Full size table

Discussion

This study found that three irreplaceable functions reflect the effectiveness of the inspector mechanism. On the one hand, the implementation of daily inspections made it possible for maintaining the best IPC status at any time. On the other hand, the awareness and enthusiasm of IPC has been maximized because the common threat of COVID-19 promoted focus and unity [21]. Many optimized IPC measures innovated by the inspectors and subjects demonstrate that the entire hospital IPC culture was sublimated. In addition, in response to the COVID-19 challenge, IPC inspections, which were previously considered a burden, have now become a means of protection for medical staff [22]. Like the observing system of Guangdong Second Provincial General Hospital, our inspector mechanism also is an infection control system to provide real-time monitoring and aid for instant correction so as to minimize the HAI risk [11]. Studies indicated that inspectors mechanism in increasing compliance with PPE use and reducing COVID-19 infection spread was widely considered to be effective [10, 23]. Of note, our part-time inspector system expanded the content and scope of supervision on the basis of previous studied.

In the present study, the appropriate usage of PPE which has been improved year by year suggested that enforcement strategy through the three-level inspector mechanism have positive attributes. With the continuous change of knowledge about COVID-19 during the crisis, the PPE usage and the proper doffing/donning technology were widely considered to be crucial, but also vague and inconsistent [24]. Even though the available guidelines for reference were updated quickly in intensity with the ongoing crisis, medical staff still struggled to choose PPE reasonably according to specific job positions [25]. The role of the inspection mechanism was not only reflected in increased PPE compliance, but more importantly, it unified proper awareness amongst staff.

Based on the clear UV/F utility of previous studies [26], we attempted to directly improve cleaning compliance using UV/F inspection method. Referring to Matthew's 20% failure rate, we believed that a clearance rate of over 80% was acceptable [27]. Notably, an AI tool was used to avoid observer bias caused by variant subjective perceptions. However, the validity in application of UV/F markers has not been defined in this study due to the lack of parallel control. Consistent with previous studies [26, 27], even with well-equipped quality control tools for the removal of the UV/F marker, the clearance rate of UV/F markers over the study period was not statistically significant. The variability in application of UV/F markers seems to make it difficult to translate into effective cleaning overall, which needs to be continuously explored in the future.

To stimulate stronger initiative, it was very necessary to configure some basic safeguards, such as sufficient supervision time and remuneration [28]. We required every department leader to sign a letter of commitment, which mainly included serving as the first person responsible for the supervision of their own department, promising to give the supervisor half a day a week to complete the task and providing supervisors with an opportunity for education or training related to HAI management once a year [29]. In terms of remuneration, our hospital had allocated an annual budget of US$30,000 for part-time HAI management. Most notably, considering it was easy to get tired of complicated and boring supervision work, quality control for supervision was an essential part [30]. A feasible method was recommended to link the supervision quantity and quality with monthly remuneration, so as to better performance of their duties could be guaranteed through incentive mechanism [31].

Judging from the records number of supervision results, the three-level inspector mechanism had well alleviated the complex basic supervision work of full-time staff, who could screen out key problems and links from these results, rather than went to the ward to slowly search for risk clues. Given that the professional quality of part-time inspectors could not reach the level of full-time staff, quantitative terms were recommended for widely use in supervision items [32]. Compared with quantitative terms, subjective judgment terms had higher requirements for inspectors' knowledge reserve. Simple and easy to grasp supervision methods could significantly improve efficiency and achieve remarkable results.

The mobile phone APP called "Star of IPC", which had been already certified by the National Copyright Administration of the People's Republic of China, had realized a paperless network platform so as to avoid cross-contamination through paper [33]. In Sichuan Province, China, 629 medical institutions have used this system for COVID-19 IPC. However, the prominent difficulty we encountered was that the APP review process for the public release was too long. Shorter frequency of APP version updates were recommend as much as possible, and it was best to design the APP function and content comprehensively in advance.

Strengths and limitations

To our knowledge, this is the largest study to investigate the effectiveness of inspector mechanism for the emergency IPC in COVID-19 epidemic period. The main strengths of this paper include continuous intervention lasting for 3 years, extensive supervisory records, paperless office inspection and AI tools.

A number of limitations of this study should be considered. First, the self-control study design have not accounted for other confounding factors that may have led to imbalance. Second, due to sporadic COVID-19 epidemic under extreme IPC, the evaluation of systemic effects was limited in the cluster levels rather than individual disease levels, which needs to be further explored.

Conclusion

Inspector mechanism for the emergency IPC in COVID-19 epidemic period from 2020 to 2022 completed an incredible inspection workload and offered creative assistance to combat the COVID-19 outbreak. Although there were some difficulties in the implementation process, optimization methods could gradually be explored to make the system run effectively. These methods and accumulated experiences should be helpful for us to strengthen IPC for future epidemic.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used during the present study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

  1. WHO. Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. 2023. https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019. Accessed 12 June 2023.

    Google Scholar 

  2. WHO. WHO Director-Generals remarks at the media briefing on 2019-nCoV on 11 February 2020. 2020. https://www.who.int/director-general/speeches/detail/who-director-general-s-remarks-at-the-media-briefing-on-2019-ncov-on-11-february-2020. Accessed 12 June 2023.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Koelle K, Martin MA, Antia R, Lopman B, Dean NE. The changing epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2. Science (New York, NY). 2022;375(6585):1116–21. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abm4915.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Dong E, Du H, Gardner L. An interactive web-based dashboard to track COVID-19 in real time. Lancet Infect Dis. 2020;20(5):533–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30120-1.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. People’s Daily. Report on the recent prevention and control of COVID-19. 2023. p. 01. http://paper.people.com.cn/rmrb/html/2023-02/17/nw.D110000renmrb_20230217_1-01.htm. Accessed 12 June 2023.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Edwards AM, Baric RS, Saphire EO, Ulmer JB. Stopping pandemics before they start: Lessons learned from SARS-CoV-2. Science (New York, NY). 2022;375(6585):1133–9. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abn1900.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. WHO. From emergency response to long-term COVID-19 disease management: sustaining gains made during the COVID-19 pandemic. 2023. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-WHE-SPP-2023.1. Accessed 12 June 2023.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Lei N, Li BX, Zhang KF, Bao H, Ding J, Wang Y. Analysis of the protective effect of infection controllers supervising third-party personnel entering and leaving Shanghai Fangcang Shelter Hospital. Infect Drug Resist. 2022;15:7519–27. https://doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S388707. Published 2022 Dec 19.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Patel AB, O’Donnell A, Bonebrake A, et al. Stewardship of personal protective equipment (PPE): An important pandemic resource for PPE preservation and education. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2021;42(5):636–7. https://doi.org/10.1017/ice.2020.311.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Shehab M, Shuaibi S, Qadhi I, Alfadhli A. Effectiveness of inspectors’ team in increasing compliance with personal protective equipment use and reducing COVID19 infection spread among healthcare workers. Infect Prev Pract. 2021;3(2):100137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infpip.2021.100137.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Chen X, Tian J, Li G, Li G. Initiation of a new infection control system for the COVID-19 outbreak. Lancet Infect Dis. 2020;20(4):397–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30110-9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Pan L, Wang L, Huang X. How to face the novel coronavirus infection during the 2019–2020 epidemic: the experience of Sichuan Provincial People’s Hospital. Intensive Care Med. 2020;46(4):573–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-020-05964-0.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Huang J, Zeng J, Xie M, Huang X, Wei X, Pan L. How to perform tracheal intubation for COVID-19 patients safely and effectively: Experience AND tips from Sichuan, China. J Clin Anesth. 2020;64:109800. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinane.2020.109800.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Lv Yu, Xiang Q, Cai M, et al. Current status of resource allocation of healthcare-associated infection management in medical institutions of Sichuan province. Chin J Nosocomiol. 2018;2018(1):2843–7.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Office of the National Health Commission. Technical guidelines on prevention and control of novel coronavirus infection in medical institutions. 1st ed. Chin J Infect Control. 2020;19(2):189–91.

  16. National Health Commission of the People's Republin of China. Technical guidelines on prevention and control of novel coronavirus infection in medical institutions. 2nd ed. 2021.  http://www.nhc.gov.cn/xcs/zhengcwj/202104/f82ac450858243e598747f99c719d917.shtml. Accessed 12 June 2023.

  17. Rural Health in China. Technical guidelines on prevention and control of novel coronavirus infection in medical institutions. 3rd ed. 2022. (01) p. 7–11 .

  18. Houghton C, Meskell P, Delaney H, Smalle M, Glenton C, Booth A, Chan XHS, Devane D, Biesty LM. Barriers and facilitators to healthcare workers’ adherence with infection prevention and control (IPC) guidelines for respiratory infectious diseases: a rapid qualitative evidence synthesis. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2020;4(4):CD013582. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD013582.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Hale R, Powell T, Drey NS, Gould DJ. Working practices and success of infection prevention and control teams: a scoping study. J Hosp Infect. 2015;89(2):77–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2014.10.006.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Health Industry Standards of the People’s Republic of China. Personal Protection Guidelines of Specific Groups during COVID-19 Epidemic. WS/T 697–2020.0. 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Gilbert GL, Kerridge I. What is needed to sustain improvements in hospital practices post-COVID-19? a qualitative study of interprofessional dissonance in hospital infection prevention and control. BMC Health Serv Res. 2022;22(1):504. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-07801-0.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Mengfang C, Yu’e Ni, Linzhi Li, et al. The practice and exploration of the infection prevention and control supervision in the designated treatment hospital of COVID-19. China Rural Health. 2021;13(23):65–7.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Yun X, Ping Z, Qiaofang He. Application efficacy of infection control observer system in operating rooms during COVID-19 epidemic period. Chin J Infect Control. 2021;03:253–6.

    Google Scholar 

  24. McCarthy R, Gino B, d’Entremont P, Barari A, Renouf TS. The importance of personal protective equipment design and donning and doffing technique in mitigating infectious disease spread: a technical report. Cureus. 2020;12(12):e12084. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.12084.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Chunhui Li, Xun H, Taban C, et al. Expert consensus on personal protection of posts in different regions of medical institutions during the COVID-19. Chin J Infect Control. 2020;19(03):199–213.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Anderson DJ, Chen LF, Weber DJ, et al. Enhanced terminal room disinfection and acquisition and infection caused by multidrug-resistant organisms and Clostridium difficile (the Benefits of Enhanced Terminal Room Disinfection study): a cluster-randomised, multicentre, crossover study. Lancet. 2017;389(10071):805–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31588-4.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Ziegler MJ, Babcock HH, Welbel SF, et al. Stopping Hospital Infections With Environmental Services (SHINE): A Cluster-randomized Trial of Intensive Monitoring Methods for Terminal Room Cleaning on Rates of Multidrug-resistant Organisms in the Intensive Care Unit [published correction appears in Clin Infect Dis. 2023 Feb 18;76(4):777]. Clin Infect Dis. 2022;75(7):1217–23. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciac070.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Wurmb T, Ertl G, Ernestus RI, Meybohm P. Command and control in hospitals during SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: The windmill model of disaster response. J Emerg Manag (Weston, Mass). 2020;18(7):19–22. https://doi.org/10.5055/jem.2020.0520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. McAlearney AS, Gaughan AA, DePuccio MJ, MacEwan SR, Hebert C, Walker DM. Management practices for leaders to promote infection prevention: Lessons from a qualitative study. Am J Infect Control. 2021;49(5):536–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2020.09.001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Pi J. Effect of Ergonomics-Based Piano Teaching on Teachers’ Physical and Mental Health and the Improvement of Sense of Happiness. J Healthc Eng. 2022;2022:9174441. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/9174441.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Hoskins K, Ulrich CM, Shinnick J, Buttenheim AM. Acceptability of financial incentives for health-related behavior change: An updated systematic review. Prev Med. 2019;126:105762. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2019.105762.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Pan S, Huang Y, Wang D. Questionnaire survey: setting “open questions” is a mistake. Soc Sci Res. 2008;176(03):81–5.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Madjaric M, Nesek-Madjaric V, Leitner H, Köle W, Gell G, Leodolter W. Paperless hospital: reality, dream or a nightmare? Stud Health Technol Inform. 2000;77:1028–32.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to express our gratitude to all inspectors who have contributed their hard work and wisdom in this study.

Funding

This study was financially supported by the Scientific and Technology Department of Sichuan Province (2023NSFSC0534).

Author information

Author notes

  1. Yu Lv and Qian Xiang contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Healthcare-Associated Infection Control Center, Sichuan Provincial People’s Hospital, school of medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, 610072, Sichuan, P. R. China

    Yu Lv, Qian Xiang, Xiaoyan Jiang, Jiayu Wu & Hongrong Cao

  2. Development Department, Chengdu Yiou Technology Co. LTD, Chengdu, 610000, Sichuan, P. R. China

    Bo Zhang

Authors
  1. Yu Lv
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Qian Xiang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Xiaoyan Jiang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Bo Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jiayu Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Hongrong Cao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Yu Lv: Methodology, Writing-original draft, Writing-review & editing. Hongrong Cao: Investigation, Writing-review & editing. Xiaoyan Jiang: Writing-review & editing. Bo Zhang: Methodology. Jiayu Wu: Conceptualization, Writing-review & editing. Qian Xiang: Conceptualization, Writing-review & editing.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Jiayu Wu or Hongrong Cao.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The Ethics Committee of Sichuan Academy of Medical Sciences, Sichuan People's Hospital, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China approved this study and exempted the informed consent as it was an observational study. All methods were carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Additional file 1: SM Table S1.

Details of intervention units.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lv, Y., Xiang, Q., Jiang, X. et al. Effectiveness of inspector mechanism for the emergency infection prevention and control in the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic period: a self-control real-word study. BMC Infect Dis 23, 858 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-023-08682-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-023-08682-2

Keywords

BMC Infectious Diseases

ISSN: 1471-2334

Contact us