INFECTION PREVENTION Infection Prevention, SPD:
United we withstand Coalition can bring influence,
order to clinical collaboration by Rick Dana Barlow
Photo credit: Monkey Business |
stock.adobe.com
n the never-ending war on bugs, détente between the clinical blocs of a healthcare organization can make a considerable difference in the cleanliness and sterility of a facility as well as affect patient outcomes. Sometimes the coalition between clinical blocs can be occupationally hierarchical, as in the more typical Sterile Processing & Distribution (SPD) reporting to Surgical Services. Even then, there’s no guarantee or inclination that the two departments can “get along” with mutual respect, trust and understanding, the trinity of organizational harmony. SPD counts the Operating Room (OR) as the customer; by and large, the OR rarely lets them forget it.
I
As for the atypical SPD and Infection Pre- vention (IP), however, the professional and relational canvas remains fresh, and for the most part, blank. Much of the industry recognizes the inher- ent ties between SPD and the OR, even if SPD reports to Supply Chain instead of Surgical Services. Yet few raise eyebrows at the rec- ommendation or even suggestion that SPD align or merely ally itself with IP. After all, the two areas/departments share common aims and goals – reducing, if not preventing, harmful bacterial, microbial, viral existence and spread throughout an organization. Initiating any kind of relationship between the two elicits some surprise in that expecta- tions about who should approach whom are not as cut-and-dry as many might surmise. There’s some common-sense logic behind the belief that IP, as the clinically trained microbial experts, should reach out to SPD. But that’s not necessarily universal among seven SPD-IP experts with whom Healthcare Purchasing News spoke about collaboration between the two. In fact, their observations reached near-parity with four favoring IP reach out to SPD and the remaining three flipping the order.
Making the rounds Linda Homan, RN, CIC, Senior Manager of Clinical Affairs, Ecolab Healthcare,
minces few words about any partnerships and the value they would bring to the orga- nization and patient.
“There is no wrong answer here,” Homan insisted. “Infection Prevention and Sterile Processing should work together closely to meet their mutual goal of patient safety. The Infection Preventionist should take every opportunity to develop strong rela- tionships with the folks in the sterile pro- cessing department and spend time in the department to understand the workflow, processes and challenges with an eye to help improve not only infection prevention, but also operational efficiency. The terile Processing Manager should consider the Infection Preventionist as a strong ally who can help make the business case for new products and processes that can improve the decontamination and sterilization process and department throughput. SPD and IP department heads should meet regularly to update each other on projects and priorities.” For Marc-Oliver Wright, MT(ASCP), CIC,
FAPIC; Clinical Science Liaison, Central Region, PDI, Infection Prevention reaching out to SPD simply represents good business and operational efficiency.
“First and foremost, it is in IP’s interest to forge that relationship early on,” Wright noted. “Failings in PD that are identified during the accreditation process usually fall under the IP standards. Outbreak investigations involving the perioperative or procedural space have to include SPD. It makes sense to build relationships with the subject matter experts before there’s a prob- lem. While I favor IP approaching SPD, the fact is that anyone can and everyone should work towards furthering the partnership so if IP is not reaching out, then SPD should.” Based on professional experience, the best
relationships are formed when IP approaches SPD, according to Alice Brewer, CIC, FAPIC, CIC, CPHQ, FAPIC, Clinical Affairs Director, PDI Healthcare’s Tru-D division. “terile processing is the first link in the
Linda Homan
infection prevention chain,” Brewer insisted. “Improperly or inadequately cleaned, disin- fected and sterilized instruments can intro-
14 April 2021 • HEALTHCARE PURCHASING NEWS •
hpnonline.com
duce pathogens into the operating room, increasing the risk of a patient acquir- ing a surgical-site infection (SSI). Inadequacies in SPD typically fall under stan- dards for IP, and outbreaks involving operating or pro-
Alice Brewer
cedural space must always include SPD. Regardless of which department initiates the relationship, it is imperative that the two work together to ensure the highest levels of cleanliness and disinfection to help curb the spread of infections.” SPD and IP should understand and
acknowledge that the two actually are united under a common cause and purpose, accord- ing to Lynn Burbank, DNP, RN, CRNP, Global Senior Manager, Infection Prevention, Olympus Corporation of the Americas. “The first step in build- ing a relationship between Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) and Ster- ile Processing (SPD) is to acknowledge the underly- ing principle of patient safety first,” Burbank
Lynn Burbank
noted. “IPC and SPD bring unique skills to their roles; collaboration between the teams can build on each department’s strengths in ensuring safe, high-quality care for their patients. It is not a matter of who should approach first, but rather an alliance between professionals.”
Burbank points to the service providers or the Endoscopy Support Specialists (ESS) at Olympus America International (OAI) who serve as the “face of product support, education and training in SPD operations,” as exemplifying the IP-SPD relationship. “These professionals collaborate with the IPC team in order to bring the voice of patient safety to providers,” she said. “Examples of this partnership include: Development of tools such as the ‘OnTrack’ forms to docu- ment customer training of how to correctly reprocess a device; document on-site obser- vation of SPD departments to assess device usage from point of care through reprocess-
Page 16
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60
