We appreciate the comments by Worth and colleagues on our article1 and agree that bloodstream infection (BSI) surveillance should occur with the goal of informing initiatives to prevent infection.
The full article is accessible to AMA members and paid subscribers. Login to read more or purchase a subscription now.
Please note: institutional and Research4Life access to the MJA is now provided through Wiley Online Library.
- 1. Si D, Runnegar N, Marquess J, et al. Characterising health care-associated bloodstream infections in public hospitals in Queensland, 2008–2012. Med J Aust 2016; 204: 276. <MJA full text>
- 2. See I, Iwamoto M, Allen-Bridson K, et al. Mucosal barrier injury laboratory-confirmed bloodstream infection: results from a field test of a new National Healthcare Safety Network definition. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2013; 34: 769-776.
- 3. Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care. Implementation guide for surveillance of central line associated bloodstream infection. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia, 2015. http://www.safetyandquality.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Implementation-Guide-for-Surveillance-of-Central-Line-Associated-Bloodstream-Infection-2016-Edition.pdf (accessed May 2016).
- 4. Infection Control Service, South Australia Health. Bloodstream infection (BSI) surveillance. Adelaide: Department of Health, Government of SA, 2016. http://www.sahealth.sa.gov.au/wps/wcm/connect/3a836a00404920b397a7b7a05d853418/BSI-surveillance-definitions_V5.1-cdcb-ics-20160201.pdf?MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=3a836a00404920b397a7b7a05d853418 (accessed May 2016).
Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.
No relevant disclosures.