McGeer Criteria in Long-Term Care: Stop Running Surveillance on Paper
When an infection preventionist opens a new case, the definition of "infection" should already sit inside the workflow - not in a binder, a shared drive, or a spreadsheet tab labeled McGeer. Revised McGeer criteria are still the backbone of infection surveillance in North American long-term care. Yet many buildings still apply them by hand: print the checklist, tick boxes, file the form, then re-enter the same data into a report for leadership or public health. That gap is where inconsistent counts, missed clusters, and wasted IP hours come from.
Here is a plain-language look at what McGeer is for, how it differs from Loeb, and what it looks like when surveillance definitions live inside your IPAC software.
What McGeer criteria are (and what they are not)
Revised McGeer criteria are surveillance definitions. They help infection prevention teams decide whether a set of signs, symptoms, and supporting findings counts as an infection for rates, trends, and outbreak work. They are not a bedside prescribing guide. That role belongs more to tools like the Loeb minimum criteria, which support decisions about whether to start an antibiotic. Mixing the two is a common source of confusion in LTC.
McGeer (revised) vs Loeb- McGeer purpose: Surveillance - counting true infections for rates and outbreaks. Loeb purpose: helping decide whether to start an antibiotic.
McGeer when used: often after more clinical or lab detail is available. Loeb when used: closer to the prescribing decision.
McGeer typical output: met / unmet surveillance definition; clean denominators for rates.
Loeb typical output: structured prompt for antimicrobial stewardship.
Use McGeer to count and trend infections. Use stewardship workflows for antibiotic decisions. They work best together, not as substitutes.
Why paper McGeer checklists break down in LTC
Infection Preventionists in skilled nursing and long-term care rarely struggle with knowing McGeer. The friction is operational: Cases span shifts, agency staff, and incomplete symptom notes. Labs and culture results arrive after the first documentation. Outbreaks need line lists and epi-curves, not a stack of scanned PDFs. Multi-site operators need the same definitions in every building. Public health may ask for a report the same day an outbreak is declared
Paper (or spreadsheet) McGeer work can produce a correct single case. It rarely produces a reliable, auditable surveillance program.
What "McGeer in the workflow" should look like
In modern IPAC software, McGeer should not be a separate homework assignment. A practical flow looks like this:
1. Log the case - Capture resident or staff signs and symptoms in one place, and attach labs and medication orders as they arrive.
2. Apply criteria in-product - Review the case against revised McGeer and IPAC Canada definitions, or against custom surveillance definitions your organization sets for local reporting.
3. Record met / unmet clearly - Anyone opening the case later can see whether surveillance criteria were met without redoing the checklist.
4. Connect related cases - Link infections into outbreak views with epi-curves and line lists when clusters appear.
5. Report without re-keying - Pull infection rates, case frequency, days of therapy, and immunization rates from the same system your team already used for the case.
That is the design intent behind HealthConnex IPAC Management: automated case review against McGeer and IPAC Canada criteria, visual floor maps for clusters, outbreak reporting, and stewardship support (medications on every case, printable med reports, antimicrobial time-out forms) in one LTC-focused platform.
Beyond the checklist: what IPs still need
Meeting McGeer on a single case is necessary. It is not sufficient. Infection preventionists still need: Floor maps to see where cases sit on the unit and how contacts spread. Outbreak tools (epi-curves, line lists, resident and staff infections together). Automated reporting for leadership and public health- Stewardship hooks so antibiotics tied to cases are visible and reviewable. Fewer double entries via EHR data pull for demographics, immunizations, meds, and labs where integrations existIf your "McGeer solution" is only a digital form with no outbreak or reporting layer, you have digitized the checklist - not the program.
FAQ
Does HealthConnex support revised McGeer criteria? Yes. IPAC Management includes automated case reviews against McGeer and IPAC Canada criteria, plus custom surveillance definitions.
Can we produce outbreak or public health reports from the same system? Yes. Teams can generate PDF or Excel line lists and trend outbreaks with epi-curves for on-demand reporting.
Is this only for Canada? No. It is built for North American LTC and senior living, with McGeer and IPAC Canada support and customizable definitions.
We already use PointClickCare. Does that matter? Many communities run PointClickCare as their EHR and still need purpose-built IPAC workflows. Ask on a demo which HealthConnex integration options fit your stack for demographics, immunizations, medications, and labs.
Closing
McGeer criteria are not going away. The question is whether your team applies them in a binder or inside the case. Put surveillance definitions in the workflow. Keep Loeb-style stewardship beside them. Give IPs maps, outbreaks, and reports from the same place they document infections.
Ready to see McGeer inside HealthConnex IPAC Management?
Request a demo: https://www.healthconnex.ai
