Hand Hygiene Compliance at Critical Points of Care

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.

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

Abstract Objective: To determine whether the order in which healthcare workers perform patient care tasks affects hand hygiene compliance. Design: For this retrospective analysis of data collected during the Strategies to Reduce Transmission of Antimicrobial Resistant Bacteria in Intensive Care Units (STAR*ICU) study, we linked consecutive tasks healthcare workers performed into care sequences and identified task transitions: 2 consecutive task sequences and the intervening hand hygiene opportunity. We compared hand hygiene compliance rates and used multiple logistic regression to determine the adjusted odds for healthcare workers (HCWs) transitioning in a direction that increased or decreased the risk to patients if healthcare workers did not perform hand hygiene before the task and for HCWs contaminating their hands. Setting: The study was conducted in 17 adult surgical, medical, and medical-surgical intensive care units. Participants: HCWs in the STAR*ICU study units. Results: HCWs moved from cleaner to dirtier tasks during 5,303 transitions (34.7%) and from dirtier to cleaner tasks during 10,000 transitions (65.4%). Physicians (odds ratio [OR]: 1.50; P < .0001) and other HCWs (OR, 2.15; P < .0001) were more likely than nurses to move from dirtier to cleaner tasks. Glove use was associated with moving from dirtier to cleaner tasks (OR, 1.22; P < .0001). Hand hygiene compliance was lower when HCWs transitioned from dirtier to cleaner tasks than when they transitioned in the opposite direction (adjusted OR, 0.93; P < .0001). Conclusions: HCWs did not organize patient care tasks in a manner that decreased risk to patients, and they were less likely to perform hand hygiene when transitioning from dirtier to cleaner tasks than the reverse. These practices could increase the risk of transmission or infection.


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


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.


2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (12) ◽  
pp. 1076-1085 ◽  
Author(s):  
Appiah Labi ◽  
Noah Obeng-Nkrumah ◽  
Benjamin Demah Nuertey ◽  
Sheila Issahaku ◽  
Ndeye Fatou Ndiaye ◽  
...  

Introduction: We aimed to investigate whether the provision of water, sanitation, and hand hygiene (WASH) interventions were associated with changes in hand hygiene compliance and perceptions of healthcare workers towards infection control. Methodology: The study was conducted from June 2017 through February 2018 among healthcare workers in two Northern districts of Ghana. Using a pretest-posttest design, we performed hand hygiene observations and perception surveys at baseline (before the start of WASH interventions) and post-intervention (midline and endline). We assessed adherence to hand hygiene practice using the WHO direct observation tool. The perception study was conducted using the WHO perception survey for healthcare workers. Study outcomes were compared between baseline, midline and endline assessments. Results: The hand hygiene compliance significantly improved from 28.8% at baseline through 51.7% at midline (n = 726/1404; 95% CI: 49.1-54.2%) to 67.9% at endline (n = 1000/1471; 95% CI: 65.6-70.3%). The highest increase in compliance was to the WHO hand hygiene moment 5 after touching patients surrounding (relative increase, 205%; relative rate, 3.05; 95% CI: 2.23-4.04; p < 0.0001). Post-intervention, the top three policies deemed most effective at improving hand hygiene practice were: provision of water source (rated mean score, n = 6.1 ± 1.4), participation in educational activities (rated mean score 6.0 ± 1.5); and hand hygiene promotional campaign (6.0 ± 1.3). Conclusion: Hand hygiene compliance significantly improved post-intervention. Sustaining good hand hygiene practices in low resource settings should include education, the provision of essential supplies, and regular hand hygiene audits and feedback.


Author(s):  
Mohammad Hossein Kaveh ◽  
Mohadeseh Motamed-Jahromi ◽  
Soheil Hassanipour

Background. Despite the availability of various guidelines, rules, and strategies, hand hygiene adherence rates among healthcare workers are reported significantly lower than expected. The aim of this meta-analysis is to determine the most effective interventions to improve hand hygiene and to develop a logic model based on the characteristics of the most effective interventions. Methods. A literature search was conducted on PubMed, ProQuest, Web of Knowledge, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and ScienceDirect databases up to December 21, 2019, with no time limit. Randomized clinical trials which had designed interventions to improve hand hygiene were reviewed. Data were extracted independently by two authors. All statistical analyses were performed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA) software (version 2.0). A random-effects model was used to estimate odds ratios. Results. Although 14 studies were initially reviewed, only 12 studies entered the meta-analysis, since they had identified percentage rates of hand hygiene compliance. The most effective intervention (odds ratio 18.4, 95% CI (13.6–24.8)) was a multilevel strategy that influenced the determinants of hand hygiene behavior at individual, interpersonal, and organizational levels. Following this, a theory-driven logic model was mapped out to promote hand hygiene, based on situational analysis. Conclusion. This study suggests that designing integrated interventions based on a multilevel socioecological approach has the greatest potential to improve hand hygiene compliance in healthcare workers. The logical model proposed in this study can thus provide a useful guide for designing and conducting future experimental research.


2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sajad Ahmad Salati ◽  
Azzam Al Kadi

Objective. The study was conducted to study the impact of various measures instituted to improve hand hygiene practices of the medical students after having documented poor hand hygiene awareness and compliance in a study conducted in 2012. Methods. A self-designed questionnaire based on World Health Organization’s concept of “Five Moments for Hand Hygiene” was used to evaluate the awareness of the indications of hand hygiene. Compliance was observed during Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) sessions. Fifty-one students participated voluntarily in the study. Results. The awareness and compliance of hand hygiene among the medical students in 2014 had shown statistically significant improvement (P<0.005) as compared to figures of the study conducted in 2012. Conclusion. Dedicated multifaceted intervention can improve the hand hygiene practices in medical students.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-23
Author(s):  
Henrico van Roekel ◽  
Joanne Reinhard ◽  
Stephan Grimmelikhuijsen

Abstract Nudging has become a well-known policy practice. Recently, ‘boosting’ has been suggested as an alternative to nudging. In contrast to nudges, boosts aim to empower individuals to exert their own agency to make decisions. This article is one of the first to compare a nudging and a boosting intervention, and it does so in a critical field setting: hand hygiene compliance of hospital nurses. During a 4-week quasi-experiment, we tested the effect of a reframing nudge and a risk literacy boost on hand hygiene compliance in three hospital wards. The results show that nudging and boosting were both effective interventions to improve hand hygiene compliance. A tentative finding is that, while the nudge had a stronger immediate effect, the boost effect remained stable for a week, even after the removal of the intervention. We conclude that, besides nudging, researchers and policymakers may consider boosting when they seek to implement or test behavioral interventions in domains such as healthcare.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document