Skip to main content
. 2019 Mar 25;25(11):1428.e7–1428.e13. doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2019.03.019

Table 1.

Validation of semi-automated surveillance

Validation sample 1 (n = 700)
Random sample of patients from study population
Validation sample 2 (n = 637)
Patients from study population having HAP according to ICD-10 discharge diagnostic codes
Validation sample 3 (n = 754)
Patients from population of four departments of the year 2016, comprising all 165 patients with and a random sample of 589 patients without HAP according to ICD-10 discharge diagnostic codes
Cross tabulation of full manual surveillance x semi-automated surveillance Full manual surveillance Full manual surveillance Full manual surveillance
nvHAP No nvHAP nvHAP No nvHAP nvHAP No nvHAP
Semi-automated surveillance nvHAP 4 0 Semi-automated surveillance nvHAP 155 0 Semi-automated surveillance nvHAP 35 0
No nvHAP 0 696 No nvHAP 4 478 No nvHAP 0 719
Sensitivity 100% (CI: 39.8–100%) 97.5% (CI: 93.7–99.3%) 100% (CI: 90.0–100%)
Negative predictive value 100% (CI: 99.5–100%) 99.2% (CI: 97.9–99.8%) 100% (CI: 99.5–100%)
Accuracy 100% (CI: 99.5–100%) 99.4% (CI: 98.4–99.8%) 100% (CI: 99.5–100%)

CI, 95% confidence interval; nvHAP, non-ventilator-associated hospital-acquired pneumonia.

Validation of ‘semi-automated surveillance’ (i.e. applying classification algorithm—to reduce number of patients needed to screen, i.e. ‘at-risk’ patients—followed by manual surveillance of ‘at-risk’ patients) by ‘full manual surveillance’ (i.e. manual surveillance of all patients) was performed on three ‘validation samples’. Fourfold tables and sensitivity, negative predictive value, and accuracy are presented for each validation sample separately.