Pick a random (perhaps new) hospital, and make every patient live in their own sealed plastic bubble. No air goes in or out - instead it is recirculated per-patient like a space station. Make staff wear hazmat suits.
Then, after a few weeks, compare patient outcomes.
Personal experience in US academia also suggests not, far more concern for early diagnosis of infection and IPAC than I saw practicing in Canada.
Some more than others.
Of course these stats have their own gameability, but good luck getting this level of data elsewhere.
I suspect that the true figure for hospital acquired infections is far higher than 1 in 8, but that they are only recorded if the infection is serious enough to cause immediate medical treatment to be necessary.
When I was in hospital a few years ago, they swabbed on every admission to test for it so it's definitely a concern.
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/mrsa-bacteraemia-mo...
For example, you can't run a food preparation place like a hospital.
However the NHS have done studies for side rooms vs group wards. there is a lot of prior research out there.
Just simply the staff having to change hazmat suits between patients, porting in and out between plastic bubbles, would add a lot of overhead and less time to offer actual care.
Not talking about all the risks involved with that "space station" like air recirculation. "Sorry about your grandma. She did not pick up an infection, but she died when the overworked technician forgot to replace her bubble's CO2 scrubber."
Not saying that the current situation is peak optimum and the best possible. Just that infection control is not the only goal to optimise for in a hospital.