Table 3d. State-specific Standardized Infection Ratios (SIRs) and facility-specific SIR summary measures, NHSN facilities reporting during 2011: Central Line-associated Bloodstream Infections (CLABSI), Neonatal Intensive Care Units (NICUs) ¹

The Central Line–associated Blood Stream Infections (CLABSI) Score is reported using a Standardized Infection Ratio (SIR). This calculation compares the number of central line infections in a hospital’s intensive care unit to a national benchmark based on data reported to NHSN from 2006 – 2008. The result is adjusted based on certain factors such as the type and size of a hospital or ICU.

• A score of less than 1 means that the hospital had fewer CLABSIs than hospitals of similar type and size.
• A score of 1 means the hospital's CLABSI score was no different than hospitals of similar type and size.
• A score of more than 1 means the hospital had more CLABSIs than hospitals of similar type and size.

Lower numbers are better. A score of zero (0) – meaning no CLABSIs – is best.

States	State NHSN Mandate2	Any Validation3	No. of Facilities Reporting4	No. of Infections		SIR	95% CI for SIR		Facility-specific SIRs at Key Percentiles5
									Median
				Observed	Predicted		Lower	Upper	10%	25%	(50%)	75%	90%
Alabama			13	81	65.490	1.237	0.982	1.537	.	.	.	.	.
Alaska			1-4	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.
Arizona			10	26	38.929	0.668	0.436	0.979	.	.	.	.	.
Arkansas	Yes		8	19	52.169	0.364	0.219	0.569	.	.	.	.	.
California	Yes	Yesa	129	173	375.872	0.460	0.394	0.534	0.000	0.000	0.368	0.834	1.333
Colorado	Yes	Yes	17	25	45.428	0.550	0.356	0.812	.	.	.	.	.
Connecticut			11	14	25.544	0.548	0.300	0.920	.	.	.	.	.
Delaware	Yes		1-4	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.
Dist. Of Columbia	Yes	Yesa	6	11	37.167	0.296	0.148	0.530	.	.	.	.	.
Florida			42	136	185.442	0.733	0.615	0.868	0.000	0.380	0.560	0.959	1.490
Georgia			32	121	122.708	0.986	0.818	1.178	0.213	0.586	0.975	1.242	1.798
Hawaii	Yes		1-4	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.
Idaho			8	8	11.543	0.693	0.299	1.366	.	.	.	.	.
Illinois	Yes	Yesa	39	79	166.648	0.474	0.375	0.591	0.000	0.244	0.382	0.625	1.033
Indiana			25	52	73.299	0.709	0.530	0.930	.	.	.	.	.
Iowa			9	11	29.761	0.370	0.185	0.661	.	.	.	.	.
Kansas			10	15	25.542	0.587	0.328	0.969	.	.	.	.	.
Kentucky			12	38	35.117	1.082	0.766	1.485	.	.	.	.	.
Louisiana			26	68	75.929	0.896	0.695	1.135	.	.	.	.	.
Maine			1-4	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.
Maryland	Yes	Yesa	17	43	67.008	0.642	0.464	0.864	.	.	.	.	.
Massachusetts	Yes	Yes	10	31	41.464	0.748	0.508	1.061	.	.	.	.	.
Michigan			18	59	91.847	0.642	0.489	0.829	.	.	.	.	.
Minnesota			9	11	25.136	0.438	0.218	0.783	.	.	.	.	.
Mississippi			14	34	26.014	1.307	0.905	1.826	.	.	.	.	.
Missouri	Yes		18	49	93.849	0.522	0.386	0.690	.	.	.	.	.
Montana			5	2	8.569	0.233	0.028	0.843	.	.	.	.	.
Nebraska			6	11	14.376	0.765	0.382	1.369	.	.	.	.	.
Nevada	Yes	Yesa	9	17	49.614	0.343	0.199	0.549	.	.	.	.	.
New Hampshire			1-4	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.
New Jersey	Yes	Yes	22	77	88.328	0.872	0.688	1.090	.	.	.	.	.
New Mexico			1-4	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.
New York	Yes	Yesa	53	185	214.107	0.864	0.744	0.998	0.000	0.406	0.839	1.305	2.524
North Carolina		Yesa	24	49	127.782	0.383	0.284	0.507	.	.	.	.	.
North Dakota			6	9	10.667	0.844	0.386	1.602	.	.	.	.	.
Ohio			17	72	132.599	0.543	0.425	0.684	.	.	.	.	.
Oklahoma			8	39	58.210	0.670	0.476	0.916	.	.	.	.	.
Oregon	Yes		7	9	21.598	0.417	0.191	0.791	.	.	.	.	.
Pennsylvania	Yes	Yes	43	95	142.623	0.666	0.539	0.814	0.000	0.230	0.494	1.033	1.210
Puerto Rico			5	6	5.329	1.126	0.413	2.451	.	.	.	.	.
Rhode Island			1-4	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.
South Carolina	Yes	Yesa	10	55	52.023	1.057	0.796	1.376	.	.	.	.	.
South Dakota			1-4	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.
Tennessee	Yes	Yes	24	66	106.285	0.621	0.480	0.790	.	.	.	.	.
Texas	Yes		112	215	345.431	0.622	0.542	0.711	0.000	0.000	0.369	0.918	1.695
Utah	Yes		13	36	41.194	0.874	0.612	1.210	.	.	.	.	.
Vermont			1-4	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.
Virginia			24	42	87.876	0.478	0.344	0.646	.	.	.	.	.
Washington	Yes	Yesa	16	28	53.074	0.528	0.350	0.763	.	.	.	.	.
West Virginia			1-4	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.
Wisconsin		Yesa	16	30	45.189	0.664	0.448	0.948	.	.	.	.	.
Wyoming			1-4	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.	.
All U.S.			928	2,198	3408.609	0.645	0.618	0.672	0.000	0.178	0.564	0.999	1.539

Footnotes for Table 3d:

1. Data from all NICU locations, including Level II/III and Level III nurseries. For purposes of this report, both umbilical-line and central-line associated bloodstream infections are considered CLABSIs.
2. Yes indicates the presence of a state mandate to report CLABSI data from any ward to NHSN at the beginning of 2011
3. Yes indicates that the state health department reported the completion of either or both of the following validation studies of NHSN CLABSI data reported from any ward location during the reporting period: data quality assessment of missing or implausible values along with state health department followup with identified facilities, and detection of outlier facilities along with state health department followup with identified facilities.
   Yes^a indicates that the state completed one or both of these activities and also conducted an audit of medical records. Information on validation efforts was requested from all states, regardless of the presence of a legislative mandate for the particular HAI type and location. Some states without mandatory reporting of a given HAI to the state health department have performed validation on NHSN data that is voluntarily shared with them by facilities.
4. SIR data is only displayed for a state if ≥5 facilities reported during the reporting period.
5. Facility-specific key percentiles were only calculated if ≥20 facilities had ≥1.0 predicted HAI during the reporting period. If a single facility’s predicted number of HAIs (e.g., CLABSI) was ‹1.0, a facility-specific SIR was neither calculated nor included in the determinations of the distribution of facility-specific SIRs.