Leveraging de-implementation science to promote infection prevention and stewardship: a roadmap and practical examples (Part II of II)

De-implementation of established practices is a common challenge in infection prevention and antimicrobial stewardship and a necessary part of the life cycle of healthcare quality improvement programs. Promoting de-implementation of ineffective antimicrobial use and increasingly of low-value diagnostic testing are cornerstones of stewardship practice. Principles of de-implementation science and the interplay of implementation and de-implementation are discussed in part I of this Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America White Paper Series.In this second part of the series, we discuss a process for applying principles of de-implementation science in infection prevention and stewardship and then review some real-world examples and case studies, including a national blood culture shortage, contact precautions, and surgical and dental prophylaxis. We use these examples to demonstrate how barriers and facilitators can be mapped to evidence-informed implementation/de-implementation strategies to promote efforts to reduce low-value, ineffective, or out-of-date practices. These real-world examples highlight the need for infection prevention and stewardship programs to adapt to changing evidence, contexts, and conditions. Although barriers to practice change are often a bit different, de-implementation can sometimes be thought of as the implementation of a new program-but the new program aims to stop rather than start doing something.As the saying goes, sometimes less really is more. Medicine and public health have a strong action bias and a strong aversion to risk and uncertainty. Although our best intentions may point us to implementing more interventions, often, the best medicine instead dictates that we do less, or nothing at all. Leveraging principles of de-implementation science can help move healthcare in the right direction when interventions are low-value, ineffective, or no longer needed.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology
Published
2025-09-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/ice.2025.76
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Healthcare cost, quality, practices
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
5.63
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Leveraging de-implementation science to promote infection prevention and stewardship: a roadmap and practical examples (Part II of II)

Lucy S Witt, Felicia Scaggs Huang, Vincent Chi‐Chung Cheng, Milner Staub et al.
2 citations
Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology
Healthcare cost, quality, practices
5.63
article

Leveraging de-implementation science to promote infection prevention and stewardship: a roadmap and practical examples (Part II of II)

Lucy S Witt, Felicia Scaggs Huang, Vincent Chi‐Chung Cheng, Milner Staub, Lynne Jones Batshon, Rupak Datta, Owen Albin, Samira Reyes Dassum, Sarah L. Krein, Joseph Ting, Westyn Branch‐Elliman, Matthew J. Ziegler, Geehan Suleyman, Jennie H. Kwon, Pranavi Sreeramoju, Sandra Castejón-Ramírez, Barry Rittmann, Mini Kamboj, Stephanie Stroever, Nkechi Emetuche
article en
2 citations

Abstract

De-implementation of established practices is a common challenge in infection prevention and antimicrobial stewardship and a necessary part of the life cycle of healthcare quality improvement programs. Promoting de-implementation of ineffective antimicrobial use and increasingly of low-value diagnostic testing are cornerstones of stewardship practice. Principles of de-implementation science and the interplay of implementation and de-implementation are discussed in part I of this Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America White Paper Series.In this second part of the series, we discuss a process for applying principles of de-implementation science in infection prevention and stewardship and then review some real-world examples and case studies, including a national blood culture shortage, contact precautions, and surgical and dental prophylaxis. We use these examples to demonstrate how barriers and facilitators can be mapped to evidence-informed implementation/de-implementation strategies to promote efforts to reduce low-value, ineffective, or out-of-date practices. These real-world examples highlight the need for infection prevention and stewardship programs to adapt to changing evidence, contexts, and conditions. Although barriers to practice change are often a bit different, de-implementation can sometimes be thought of as the implementation of a new program-but the new program aims to stop rather than start doing something.As the saying goes, sometimes less really is more. Medicine and public health have a strong action bias and a strong aversion to risk and uncertainty. Although our best intentions may point us to implementing more interventions, often, the best medicine instead dictates that we do less, or nothing at all. Leveraging principles of de-implementation science can help move healthcare in the right direction when interventions are low-value, ineffective, or no longer needed.

Infection Control and Hospital EpidemiologyVol. 46(10)
Texas Tech University (US), Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center (US), St. Jude Children's Research Hospital (US), Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (US), Roger Williams Medical Center (US), Emory University (US), Henry Ford Health System (US), University of Alberta (CA), University of Tennessee Health Science Center (US), University of California, Los Angeles (US), Virginia Commonwealth University (US), Wayne State University (US), Washington University in St. Louis (US), Cornell University (US), University of Michigan (US), Queen Mary Hospital (CN), University Health System (US), Yale University (US), California University of Pennsylvania (US), VA Connecticut Healthcare System (US), Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (US), VA Tennessee Valley Healthcare System (US), VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System (US), Film Independent (US), Olive View-UCLA Medical Center (US), Center for the Study of Healthcare Provider Behavior (US), VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System (US), University of Cincinnati (US), University of Pennsylvania (US), Michigan State University (US), Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Healthcare cost, quality, practices
5.63
DOIOpen Access PDFOpenAlex
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.