Role of a multimodal intervention to promote hand hygiene compliance among healthcare workers

2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (suppl_4) ◽  
Author(s):  
V Baccolini ◽  
P de Soccio ◽  
V D'Egidio ◽  
G Migliara ◽  
C Marzuillo ◽  
...  
2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (suppl_4) ◽  
Author(s):  
V Baccolini ◽  
P de Soccio ◽  
V D'Egidio ◽  
G Migliara ◽  
C Marzuillo ◽  
...  

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


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.


2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kimberly Corace ◽  
Jeffrey Smith ◽  
Tara Macdonald ◽  
Leandre Fabrigar ◽  
Andrea Chambers ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. S426-S427
Author(s):  
Bhagyashri D Navalkele ◽  
Myrtle Tate ◽  
Jeff Dunaway ◽  
Sheila Fletcher ◽  
Barbara Inman ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Since the early 19th century, hand hygiene (HH) has been recognized as the most important factor in preventing healthcare-associated infections (HAI). Still, improving HH compliance is a major hurdle for most healthcare facilities. Our study objective was to evaluate effectiveness of bundled intervention tools in increasing hand hygiene (HH) compliance. Methods The study was performed at the University of Mississippi Medical Center located in Jackson, MS. A multidisciplinary HH team was established in January 2016. Team members included infection prevention, nurse managers, physician, resident, housekeeping, process engineers, and ancillary staff. Hand hygiene compliance was determined based on room entry and exit observations. Intervention strategies were based on Joint Commission Center’s Targeted Solutions Tool (TST) to identify barriers in HH compliance, standardization of data collection, covert observer training and Just-in-time training of providers. Other strategies implemented included education and feedback, rewards and recognition, and system change measures during the 3-year study period (timeline in Table 1). Hand hygiene compliance was calculated based on number of compliance opportunities/total number of observations. One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was performed to analyze HH data. We did not assess the concomitant reduction in HAI rates as simultaneous HAI prevention strategies confounded analysis. Results Based on total 95,491 observations performed (January 2016- December 2018), there was a statistically significant improvement in HH compliance during the study period from 66.5% in 2016 to 73% in 2017 and 79.5% in 2018 (P = 0.04). Conclusion At our institution, we observed a 56% improvement in hand hygiene compliance over 36-months timeframe. Multidisciplinary team involvement and multimodal intervention strategies play crucial role in improvement and sustainment of HH compliance. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.


2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (5) ◽  
pp. 177-186
Author(s):  
Aaron Asibi Abuosi ◽  
Samuel Kaba Akoriyea ◽  
Gloria Ntow-Kummi ◽  
Joseph Akanuwe ◽  
Patience Aseweh Abor ◽  
...  

Objective To assess hand hygiene compliance in selected primary hospitals in Ghana. Design A cross-sectional health facility-based observational study was conducted in primary health care facilities in five regions in Ghana. A total of 546 healthcare workers including doctors, nurses, midwives and laboratory personnel from 106 health facilities participated in the study. Main outcome measures The main outcome measures included availability of hand hygiene materials and alcohol job aids; compliance with moments of hand hygiene; and compliance with steps in hygienic hand washing. These were assessed using descriptive statistics. Results The mean availability of hand hygiene material and alcohol job aids was 75% and 71% respectively. This was described as moderately high, but less desirable. The mean hand hygiene compliance with moments of hand hygiene was 51%, which was also described asmoderately high, but less desirable. It was observed that, generally, hand hygiene was performed after procedures than before. However, the mean compliance with steps in hygienic hand washing was 86%, which was described as high and desirable. Conclusion Healthcare workers are generally competent in performance of hygienic hand washing. However, this does not seem to influence compliance with moments of hand hygiene. Efforts must therefore be made to translate the competence of healthcare workers in hygienic hand washing into willingness to comply with moments of hand hygiene, especially contact with patients.


2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Cassie Cunningham Goedken ◽  
Daniel J. Livorsi ◽  
Michael Sauder ◽  
Mark W. Vander Weg ◽  
Emily E. Chasco ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Implementation science experts define champions as “supporting, marketing, and driving through an implementation, overcoming indifference or resistance that the intervention may provoke in an organization.” Many hospitals use designated clinical champions—often called “hand hygiene (HH) champions”—typically to improve hand hygiene compliance. We conducted an ethnographic examination of how infection control teams in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) use the term “HH champion” and how they define the role. Methods An ethnographic study was conducted with infection control teams and frontline staff directly involved with hand hygiene across 10 geographically dispersed VHA facilities in the USA. Individual and group semi-structured interviews were conducted with hospital epidemiologists, infection preventionists, multi-drug-resistant organism (MDRO) program coordinators, and quality improvement specialists and frontline staff from June 2014 to September 2017. The team coded the transcripts using thematic content analysis content based on a codebook composed of inductive and deductive themes. Results A total of 173 healthcare workers participated in interviews from the 10 VHA facilities. All hand hygiene programs at each facility used the term HH champion to define a core element of their hand hygiene programs. While most described the role of HH champions as providing peer-to-peer coaching, delivering formal and informal education, and promoting hand hygiene, a majority also included hand hygiene surveillance. This conflation of implementation strategies led to contradictory responsibilities for HH champions. Participants described additional barriers to the role of HH champions, including competing priorities, staffing hierarchies, and turnover in the role. Conclusions Healthcare systems should consider narrowly defining the role of the HH champion as a dedicated individual whose mission is to overcome resistance and improve hand hygiene compliance—and differentiate it from the role of a “compliance auditor.” Returning to the traditional application of the implementation strategy may lead to overall improvements in hand hygiene and reduction of the transmission of healthcare-acquired infections.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document