Hand hygiene compliance before and after wearing gloves among intensive care unit nurses in Iran

2016 ◽  
Vol 44 (11) ◽  
pp. e279-e281 ◽  
Author(s):  
Azam Ghorbani ◽  
Leila Sadeghi ◽  
Akram Shahrokhi ◽  
Asghar Mohammadpour ◽  
Mary Addo ◽  
...  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (5) ◽  
pp. 408-413 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arunava Biswas ◽  
Sangeeta Das Bhattacharya ◽  
Arun Kumarendu Singh ◽  
Mallika Saha

Abstract Objective Our goal for this study was to quantify healthcare provider compliance with hand hygiene protocols and develop a conceptual framework for increasing hand hygiene compliance in a low-resource neonatal intensive care unit. Materials and Methods We developed a 3-phase intervention that involved departmental discussion, audit, and follow-up action. A 4-month unobtrusive audit during night and day shifts was performed. The audit results were presented, and a conceptual framework of barriers to and solutions for increasing hand hygiene compliance was developed collectively. Results A total of 1308 hand hygiene opportunities were observed. Among 1227 planned patient contacts, hand-washing events (707 [58.6%]), hand rub events (442 [36%]), and missed hand hygiene (78 [6.4%]) events were observed. The missed hand hygiene rate was 20% during resuscitation. Missed hand hygiene opportunities occurred 3.2 times (95% confidence interval, 1.9–5.3 times) more often during resuscitation procedures than during planned contact and 6.14 times (95% confidence interval, 2.36–16.01 times) more often when providers moved between patients. Structural and process determinants of hand hygiene noncompliance were identified through a root-cause analysis in which all members of the neonatal intensive care unit team participated. The mean hand-washing duration was 40 seconds. In 83% of cases, drying hands after washing was neglected. Hand recontamination after hand-washing was seen in 77% of the cases. Washing up to elbow level was observed in 27% of hand-wash events. After departmental review of the study results, hand rubs were placed at each bassinet to address these missed opportunities. Conclusions Hand hygiene was suboptimal during resuscitation procedures and between patient contacts. We developed a conceptual framework for improving hand hygiene through a root-cause analysis.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dikeledi Carol Sebola ◽  
Charlie Boucher ◽  
Caroline Maslo ◽  
Daniel Nenene Qekwana

Abstract Hand hygiene compliance remains the cornerstone of infection prevention and control (IPC) in healthcare facilities. However, there is a paucity of information on the level of IPC in veterinary health care facilities in South Africa. Therefore, this study evaluated hand hygiene compliance of healthcare workers and visitors in the intensive care unit (ICU) at the Onderstepoort Veterinary Academic Hospital (OVAH). Method: A cross-sectional study was conducted among healthcare workers (HCWs) and visitors in the ICU using the infection control assessment tool (ICAT) as stipulated by the South African National Department of Health. Direct observations using the “five hand hygiene moments” criteria as set out by the World helath Organisation were also recorded. The level of compliance and a 95% confidence interval were calculated for all variables. Results: Individual bottles of alcohol-based hand-rub solution and hand-wash basins with running water, soap dispensers, and paper towels were easily accessible and available at all times in the ICU. In total, 296 observations consisting of 734 hand hygiene opportunities were recorded. Hand hygiene compliance was also evaluated during invasive (51.4%) and non-invasive (48.6%) procedures. The overall hand hygiene compliance was 24.3% (178/734). In between patients, most HCWs did not sanitize stethoscopes, leashes, and cellular phones used. Additionally, the majority of HCWs wore jewellery below the elbows. The most common method of hand hygiene was hand-rub (58.4%), followed by hand-wash (41.6%). Nurses had a higher (44%) level of compliance compared to students (22%) and clinicians (15%). Compliance was also higher after body fluid exposure (42%) compared to after patient contact (32%), before patient contact (19%), after contact with patient surroundings (16%), and before an aseptic procedure (15%). Conclusion: Hand hygiene compliance in this study was low, raising concerns of potential transmission of hospital-acquired infections and zoonoses in the ICU. Therefore, it is essential that educational programs be developed to address the low level of hand hygiene in this study.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mayra Gonçalves Menegueti ◽  
Fernando Bellissimo-Rodrigues ◽  
Marcia A. Ciol ◽  
Maria Auxiliadora-Martins ◽  
Anibal Basile-Filho ◽  
...  

Abstract Background/Objective. After wearing powdered gloves, healthcare workers (HCW) are supposed to wash their hands instead of using alcohol-based hand-rub (ABHR). Washing hands takes longer than using ABHR, and the use of powdered gloves may be an obstacle to hand-hygiene compliance. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of replacing powdered gloves with powder-free gloves on hand-hygiene compliance among HCW of an intensive care unit (ICU). Methods. A quasi-experimental study was conducted in a general ICU of a tertiary care university hospital in Brazil. From June 1st to July 15th, 2017, all HCW were provided with powdered latex gloves only for all clinical procedures. From July 15th to August 31st, 2017, HCW were provided with nitrile powder-free gloves only. Hand-hygiene compliance was assessed through direct observation, and evaluated according to the World Health Organization (WHO) Hand Hygiene guidelines. We calculated that a sample size of 544 hand hygiene opportunities needed to be observed per period. Data analysis were performed using the STATA SE® version 14, and we compared the individual’s percentage of compliance using the t test for paired data before and after the intervention.Results. Overall, 40 HCW were assessed before and after the introduction of nitrile powder-free gloves, with 1114 and 1139 observations of hand hygiene opportunities, respectively. The proportion of compliance with hand hygiene was 55% (95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 51-59%) using powdered latex gloves and 60% (95% CI: 57-63%) using powder-free gloves. The difference in proportions between the two types of gloves was 5.1% (95% CI: 2.5-7.6%, p<0.001).Conclusion. Our data indicate that replacing powdered gloves with powder-free gloves positively influenced hand-hygiene compliance by HCW in an ICU setting.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document