“According to the most recent …show more content…
Doctors working on cadavers, then live patients, unwashed hands, and no personal protective equipment. Medical knowledge was limited in those days, medical personnel unknowingly contributed to the advancement of diseases and deaths. Today, nosocomial infections are not necessarily the fault of the facility or staff, most can be attributed to patient’s visitors or the patient’s ignorance or indifference to their condition. This kind of data analysis on a preventable event, made the need for risk management to be developed. These infections target certain age groups, those with a compromised immune system, such as the elderly or the very young. The infections also target opportune openings, hospitals have multiple invasive procedures that allow for this opportunity. Procedures such as surgery, I.V.’s, catheterization (cardiac, or urinary), and treatments to patient’s with burns. Hospitals, to their credit, are practicing less …show more content…
However, neither concept is compatible with current risk management principles that include blame-free reporting, collective use of reported events for root-cause analysis, and continuous quality improvement. Accepting the idea of zero tolerance would mean weakening the impact of risk management programs, at a time when they are just starting to be more widely adopted.” (Carlet, Fabry, Amalberti, & Degos, 2009) With a collaborative effort on the parts of: health care personnel, insurance companies, training programs, and new technology, nosocomial infections could be the exception to the rule instead of the norm. Unfortunately, there will never be a zero risk of nosocomial infections in the health care setting for a couple of reasons. Educating the public about risks in health care interventions has become increasingly difficult. There can be several factors that can attribute to the risks of infections: patient condition, severity of disease, and length of