Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control (Aug 2023)

Contact investigations for antibiotic-resistant bacteria: a mixed-methods study of patients’ comprehension of and compliance with self-sampling requests post-discharge

  • Anneloes van Veen,
  • Dominique L. A. Lescure,
  • Suzanne J. C. Verhaegh,
  • Inge de Goeij,
  • Vicki Erasmus,
  • Ed F. van Beeck,
  • Aimée Tjon-a-Tsien,
  • José Splinter,
  • Jan C. Christiaanse,
  • Marjolein Damen,
  • Elisabeth G. W. Huijskens,
  • Sunita Paltansing,
  • Michiel van Rijn,
  • Jacobien Veenemans,
  • Margreet C. Vos,
  • Juliëtte A. Severin,
  • the Infection Prevention and Antimicrobial Resistance Care Network South-western Netherlands

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13756-023-01277-1
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 12, no. 1
pp. 1 – 13

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background Contact investigation is an important tool to identify unrecognized patients who are colonized with antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Many Dutch hospitals include already discharged contact patients by sending them a self-sampling request at home, incl. an information letter and sampling materials. Each hospital composes these information letters on their own initiative, however, whether discharged patients comprehend and comply with these requests remains unclear. Therefore, the aim was to provide insight into patients’ comprehension of and self-reported compliance with self-sampling requests post-discharge. Methods This mixed-methods study was performed in eight Dutch hospitals. First, the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) language level of self-sampling request letters was established. Second, a questionnaire about patients’ comprehension of the letter, self-reported compliance, and reasons for compliance or non-compliance were sent to patients that received such a request in 2018/2019. Finally, a random selection of questionnaire respondents was interviewed between January and March 2020 to gain additional insights. Results CEFR levels of 15 letters were established. Four letters were assigned level B1, four letters B1–B2, and seven letters B2. The majority of patients reported good comprehension of the letter they had received. Conversely, some respondents indicated that information about the bacterium (18.4%), the way in which results would be communicated (18.1%), and the self-sampling instructions (9.7%) were (partially) unclear. Furthermore, self-reported compliance was high (88.8%). Reasons to comply were personal health (84.3%), the health of others (71.9%), and general patient safety (96.1%). Compliant patients appeared to have a need for confirmation, wanted to protect family and/or friends, and felt they were providing the hospital the ability to control the transmission of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Although a limited number of non-compliant patients responded to the questionnaire, it seemed that more patients did not comply with self-sampling requests when they received a letter in a higher CEFR-level (B2) compared to a lower CEFR-level (< B2) (9.8% vs. 2.5%, P = 0.049). Conclusions This study showed an overall good comprehension of and high self-reported compliance with self-sampling requests post-discharge. Providing balanced information in self-sampling request letters has the potential to reduce patient’s ambiguity and concerns, and can cause increased compliance with self-sampling requests.

Keywords