scholarly journals Access to Alcohol-Based Hand Rub Is Associated With Improved Hand Hygiene in an Ebola-Threatened District of Western Uganda

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. s457-s457
Author(s):  
Mohammed Lamorde ◽  
Matthew Lozier ◽  
Maureen Kesande ◽  
Patricia Akers ◽  
Olive Tumuhairwe ◽  
...  

Background: Ebola virus disease (EVD) is highly transmissible and has a high mortality rate. During outbreaks, EVD can spread across international borders. Inadequate hand hygiene places healthcare workers (HCWs) at increased risk for healthcare-associated infections, including EVD. In high-income countries, alcohol-based hand rub (ABHR) can improve hand hygiene compliance among HCWs in healthcare facilities (HCF). We evaluated local production and district-wide distribution of a WHO-recommended ABHR formulation and associations between ABHR availability in HCF and HCW hand hygiene compliance. Methods: The evaluation included 30 HCF in Kabarole District, located in Western Uganda near the border with the Democratic Republic of the Congo, where an EVD outbreak has been ongoing since August 2018. We recorded baseline hand hygiene practices before and after patient contact among 46 healthcare workers across 20 HCFs in August 2018. Subsequently, in late 2018, WHO/UNICEF distributed commercially produced ABHR to all 30 HCFs in Kabarole as part of Ebola preparedness efforts. In February 2019, our crossover evaluation distributed 20 L locally produced ABHR to each of 15 HCFs. From June 24–July 5, 2019, we performed follow-up observations of hand hygiene practices among 68 HCWs across all 30 HCFs. We defined hand hygiene as handwashing with soap or using ABHR. We conducted focus groups with healthcare workers at baseline and follow-up. Results: We observed hand hygiene compliance before and after 203 and 308 patient contacts at baseline and follow-up, respectively. From baseline to follow-up, hand hygiene compliance before patient contact increased for ABHR use (0% to 17%) and handwashing with soap (0% to 5%), for a total increase from 0% to 22% (P < .0001). Similarly, hand hygiene after patient contact increased from baseline to follow-up for ABHR use (from 3% to 55%), and handwashing with soap decreased (from 12% to 7%), yielding a net increase in hand hygiene compliance after patient contact from 15% to 62% (P < .0001). Focus groups found that HCWs prefer ABHR to handwashing because it is faster and more convenient. Conclusions: In an HCF in Kabarole District, the introduction of ABHR appeared to improve hand hygiene compliance. However, the confirmation of 3 EVD cases in Uganda 120 km from Kabarole District 2 weeks before our follow-up hand hygiene observations may have influenced healthcare worker behavior and hand hygiene compliance. Local production and district-wide distribution of ABHR is feasible and may contribute to improved hand hygiene compliance among healthcare workers.Funding: NoneDisclosures: Mohammed Lamorde, Contracted Research - Janssen Pharmaceutica, ViiV, Mylan

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.


2009 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 578-580 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael A. Borg ◽  
Mohamed Benbachir ◽  
Barry D. Cookson ◽  
Saida Ben Redjeb ◽  
Ziad Elnasser ◽  
...  

A total of 2,725 healthcare workers in 8 Mediterranean countries replied to a self-assessment questionnaire that assessed their perceptions on hand hygiene. Responses revealed that rates of hand hygiene compliance before patient contact were significantly less than rates after patient contact (P < .001) and that use of soap and water was preferred over use of alcohol-based hand rub. These findings suggest that self-protection could be a major subliminal driver for performance of hand hygiene.


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.


2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 60-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dina Lary ◽  
Aaron Calvert ◽  
Brigitte Nerlich ◽  
Joel Segal ◽  
Natalie Vaughan ◽  
...  

Background: Numerous interventions have tried to improve healthcare workers’ hand hygiene compliance. However, little attention has been paid to children’s and their visitors’ compliance. Aim: To test whether interactive educational interventions increase children’s and visitors’ compliance with hand hygiene. Methods: This was a cluster randomised study of hand hygiene compliance before and after the introduction of educational interventions. Observations were compared for different moments of hygiene and times of the day. Qualitative data in the form of questionnaire-based structured interviews were obtained. Findings: Hand hygiene compliance increased by 24.4% ( P < 0.001) following the educational interventions, with children’s compliance reaching 40.8% and visitors’ being 50.8%. Compliance varied depending on which of the five moments of hygiene was observed ( P < 0.001), with the highest compliance being ‘after body fluid exposure’ (72.7%). Responses from questionnaires showed educational interventions raised awareness of the importance of hand hygiene (69%, 57%) compared to those who had not experienced the educational intervention (50%). Conclusion: Educational interventions may result in a significant increase in children’s and visitors’ hand hygiene ( P < 0.001).


Author(s):  
Nai-Chung Nelson Chang ◽  
Heather Schacht Reisinger ◽  
Marin L Schweizer ◽  
ichael Jones ◽  
Elizabeth Chrischilles ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Most articles on hand hygiene report either overall compliance or compliance with specific hand hygiene moments. These moments vary in the level of risk to patients if healthcare workers (HCWs) are noncompliant. We assessed how task type affected HCWs’ hand hygiene compliance. Methods We linked consecutive tasks individual HCWs performed during the Strategies to Reduce Transmission of Antimicrobial Resistant Bacteria in Intensive Care Units (STAR*ICU) study into care sequences and identified task pairs—2 consecutive tasks and the intervening hand hygiene opportunity. We defined tasks as critical and/or contaminating. We determined the odds of critical and contaminating tasks occurring, and the odds of hand hygiene compliance using logistic regression for transition with a random effect adjusting for isolation precautions, glove use, HCW type, and compliance at prior opportunities. Results Healthcare workers were less likely to do hand hygiene before critical tasks than before other tasks (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.97 [95% confidence interval {CI}, .95–.98]) and more likely to do hand hygiene after contaminating tasks than after other tasks (aOR, 1.12 [95% CI, 1.10–1.13]). Nurses were more likely to perform both critical and contaminating tasks, but nurses’ hand hygiene compliance was better than physicians’ (aOR, 0.94 [95% CI, .91–.97]) and other HCWs’ compliance (aOR, 0.87 [95% CI, .87–.94]). Conclusions Healthcare workers were more likely to do hand hygiene after contaminating tasks than before critical tasks, suggesting that habits and a feeling of disgust may influence hand hygiene compliance. This information could be incorporated into interventions to improve hand hygiene practices, particularly before critical tasks and after contaminating tasks.


2011 ◽  
Vol 32 (10) ◽  
pp. 1016-1028 ◽  
Author(s):  
John M. Boyce

Monitoring hand hygiene compliance and providing healthcare workers with feedback regarding their performance are considered integral parts of multidisciplinary hand hygiene improvement programs. Observational surveys conducted by trained personnel are currently considered the “gold standard” method for establishing compliance rates, but they are time-consuming and have a number of shortcomings. Monitoring hand hygiene product consumption is less time-consuming and can provide useful information regarding the frequency of hand hygiene that can be used to give caregivers feedback. Electronic counting devices placed in hand hygiene product dispensers provide detailed information about hand hygiene frequency over time, by unit and during interventions. Electronic hand hygiene monitoring systems that utilize wireless systems to monitor room entry and exit of healthcare workers and their use of hand hygiene product dispensers can provide individual and unit-based data on compliance with the most common hand hygiene indications. Some systems include badges (tags) that can provide healthcare workers with real-time reminders to clean their hands upon entering and exiting patient rooms. Preliminary studies suggest that use of electronic monitoring systems is associated with increased hand hygiene compliance rates and that such systems may be acceptable to care givers. Although there are many questions remaining about the practicality, accuracy, cost, and long-term impact of electronic monitoring systems on compliance rates, they appear to have considerable promise for improving our efforts to monitor and improve hand hygiene practices among healthcare workers.


Author(s):  
Inna Fairuuza Firdaus ◽  
Dwiyanti Puspitasari ◽  
Marijam Purwanta

Introduction: Hospitalized neonates are at risk of developing nosocomial sepsis, a systemic infection due to unhygienic healthcare, especially in Indonesia where healthcare-associated infection incidence rate is 5.9%-8.3%. Hand hygiene by healthcare workers is an effective measure to prevent it. This study aimed to understand the healthcare workers’ hand hygiene compliance towards WHO guidelines 2009 in Dr. Soetomo General Hospital NICU. Methods: This research was an observational study. The healthcare workers’ hand hygiene compliance was obtained through 6 months of direct observation, from November 2018 to April 2019, with doctors and nurses who agreed to be observed and present during the observation period as samples. The observation was recorded with WHO observation form, and processed with Microsoft Excel 2013 to obtain compliance rate. Results: Overall, the compliance of healthcare worker in NICU Dr. Soetomo General Hospital during the 6 months of study was 84%. Nurses’ compliance was higher (87%) than doctors’ (78%). Compliance to My 5 Moments of Hand Hygiene indications varied from 82% for moments before patient contact to 93% for moments after patient contact. Conclusion: In conclusion, hand hygiene compliance of healthcare workers in Dr. Soetomo General Hospital NICU varied between profession categories and each indication. To maintain and improve hand hygiene compliance, intervention in healthcare workers’ behavior is needed, so that healthcare-associated infection can be better prevented.


Author(s):  
Gwen R. Teesing ◽  
Jan Hendrik Richardus ◽  
Vicki Erasmus ◽  
Mariska Petrignani ◽  
Marion P. G. Koopmans ◽  
...  

Abstract We investigated whether an intervention to improve hand hygiene compliance in nursing homes changed glove use. Hand hygiene compliance increased, but substitution of hand hygiene with gloves did not decrease. We observed a reduction of inappropriately unchanged gloves after exposure to body fluids. Clinical trials identifier: Netherlands Trial Register, trial NL6049 (NTR6188): https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/6049.


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 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