Efforts to reduce infections acquired during a hospital stay through improvements in the quality of care have had measurable results in many hospital settings. In pediatric intensive care units, the right quality interventions can save lives and money. We found that improving practices of hand hygiene, oral care, and central-line catheter care reduced hospital-acquired infections and improved mortality rates among children admitted to a large pediatric intensive care unit in 2007-09. In addition, on average patients admitted after the quality interventions were fully implemented spent 2.3 fewer days in the hospital, their hospitalization cost $12,136 less, and mortality was 2.3 percentage points lower, compared to patients admitted before the interventions. The projected annual cost savings for the single pediatric intensive care unit studied was approximately $12 million. Given the modest expenses incurred for these improvements-which mainly consisted of posters for an educational campaign, a training "fair," roughly $21 per day for oral care kits, about $0.60 per day for chlorhexidine antiseptic patches, and hand sanitizers attached to the walls outside patients' rooms-this represents a significant return on investment. Used on a larger scale, these quality improvements could save lives and reduce costs for patients, hospitals, and payers around the country, provided that sustained efforts ensure compliance with new protocols and achieve long-lasting changes.
Global collaboration is increasingly important across universities and conservation biology organizations. In this example, a partnership resulted in the creation of a short-course aimed at exploring communication forms and digital tools that facilitate scholarly communication in conservation biology. Questions the authors hoped to answer in the course were: What are the benefits and limitations of these tools? How can researchers in conservation biology use these methods to share data, show impact and connect to colleagues and stakeholders? Why is open access even more important in this highly collaborative scholarly environment? How can communities of interest benefit scientists and the public?
A collection assessment project was conducted in 1998 of the twenty-eight community college library/Library Resource Center (LRC) collections in Florida.1 The evaluative materials provided to each of the institutions produced a number of outcomes. To assess the project’s impact, a survey was conducted in fall 2000. The impact study found that, in the opinion of library administrators, the Florida Community College Collection Assessment study had influenced the appropriation of additional funds, informed librarians’ collection development decisions, and affected the weeding of collections through the presentation of institution-specific collection assessment reports that were provided for each library. The major finding of the impact study was that the additional funding for community college library acquisitions, passed by the Florida legislature in 1999, was not wholly successful in the revamping of outdated book collections because many of the Florida community college libraries received only part or none of the funding. The utilization of the project data, the findings of the impact study, and other follow-up to the project are reported in this article.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.