Information Technology on Hand Hygiene Compliance among Healthcare Professionals: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Author(s):  
Tang‐Yu Lin ◽  
Chin‐Ting Lin ◽  
Kuei‐Min Chen ◽  
Hui‐Fen Hsu
2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Negasa Eshete Soboksa ◽  
Belay Negassa ◽  
GirumGebremeskel Kanno ◽  
Zemachu Ashuro ◽  
DinkineshBegna Gudeta

Background. Promoting hand hygiene compliance should be a priority for health authorities and all healthcare facilities at all levels. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to provide a pooled estimate of hand hygiene compliance and associated factors among healthcare professionals in Ethiopia. Methods. PubMed, Science Direct, EMBASE, the Google search engine, and Google Scholar were used to retrieve studies that were eligible for the study. The searches included all studies published in English prior to July 2021. Using a structured data extraction format, two authors independently extracted the required data. STATA Version 16 software has been used for statistical analysis. To measure the heterogeneity of the studies, the Cochrane Q-test statistics and I2 test were used. Because of the significant heterogeneity, a random-effects model was used. Results. The pooled hand hygiene compliance among healthcare workers in Ethiopia was 38% (95% CI: 0.16–0.59). According to the study’s subgroup analysis, Addis Ababa City administration health workers had the highest hand hygiene compliance, at 73% (95% CI: 0.50–0.96), while SNNP regional state had the lowest, at 9% (95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Presence of hand hygiene promotion (OR: 2.14, 95% CI: 1.04–3.24), towel/tissue paper availability (OR: 3.97, 95% CI: 2.09–5.86), having a positive attitude toward hand hygiene (OR: 1.79, 95% CI: 1.28–2.30), having good knowledge about hand hygiene (OR: 3.45, 95% CI: 1.26–5.64), and being trained for hand hygiene (OR:4.97, 95% CI:1.81–8.14) were significantly associated with hand hygiene compliance. Conclusion. In this analysis, hand hygiene compliance among healthcare workers in Ethiopia was less than half. Providing hand hygiene promotion, towel/tissue paper presence, having a positive attitude toward hand hygiene, having good knowledge about hand hygiene, and being trained for hand hygiene were important variables for the increment of hand hygiene compliance.


2018 ◽  
Vol 39 (12) ◽  
pp. 1449-1456 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lesley Price ◽  
Jennifer MacDonald ◽  
Lucyna Gozdzielewska ◽  
Tracey Howe ◽  
Paul Flowers ◽  
...  

AbstractObjectiveTo synthesize the existing evidence base of systematic reviews of interventions to improve healthcare worker (HCW) hand hygiene compliance (HHC).MethodsPRISMA guidelines were followed, and 10 information sources were searched in September 2017, with no limits to language or date of publication, and papers were screened against inclusion criteria for relevance. Data were extracted and risk of bias was assessed.ResultsOverall, 19 systematic reviews (n=20 articles) were included. Only 1 article had a low risk of bias. Moreover, 15 systematic reviews showed positive effects of interventions on HCW HHC, whereas 3 reviews evaluating monitoring technology did not. Findings regarding whether multimodal rather than single interventions are preferable were inconclusive. Targeting social influence, attitude, self-efficacy, and intention were associated with greater effectiveness. No clear link emerged between how educational interventions were delivered and effectiveness.ConclusionsThis is the first systematic review of systematic reviews of interventions to improve HCW HHC. The evidence is sufficient to recommend the implementation of interventions to improve HCW HHC (except for monitoring technology), but it is insufficient to make specific recommendations regarding the content or how the content should be delivered. Future research should rigorously apply behavior change theory, and recommendations should be clearly described with respect to intervention content and how it is delivered. Such recommendations should be tested for longer terms using stronger study designs with clearly defined outcomes.


2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 70-77
Author(s):  
Ronald H J van Gils ◽  
Onno K Helder ◽  
Linda S G L Wauben

IntroductionSustained high compliance with hand hygiene prior to patient contact in a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) could reduce the spread of pathogens and incidence of bloodstream infections of preterm infants. These infections are associated with high mortality, morbidity and additional costs. Behaviour change interventions to promote hand hygiene, such as education, have only temporary beneficial effect on compliance. Our aim is to develop a technical intervention that supports a sustainable behaviour change for appropriate hand hygiene among NICU healthcare professionals.MethodsStudents from different disciplines incrementally designed and evaluated solutions in co-creation with healthcare professionals of a NICU in a teaching hospital.ResultsA prototype of the ‘Incubator Traffic Light’ system for neonatal incubators was developed, that is, a touchless alcohol-based hand rub (ABHR) dispenser with integrated colour display and incubator door sensor with lights. The system provides visual feedback to support healthcare professionals’ compliance with the prescribed 30 s drying time for ABHR. After 30 s, green lights indicate that the incubator doors may be opened. In the event that doors are opened without dispensing ABHR or earlier than 30 s, blinking orange lights and a display message urge the person to close the doors. The system documents compliance data in a web-based database.ConclusionsWe developed a sophisticated technical intervention to support hand hygiene compliance. It is ready for clinical tests that should prove that the system contributes to sustainable hand hygiene compliance near neonatal incubators.


2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. s346-s346
Author(s):  
Evelyn Sanchez ◽  
Lauro Perdigão-Neto ◽  
Sânia Alves dos Santos ◽  
Camila Rizek ◽  
Maria Renata Gomez ◽  
...  

Background: The introduction of new technologies into the medical field has the duality of improvement and concerns about correct usage and cleaning. Mobile phones are used by healthcare professionals (HCPs) in the work place, and there is not an official policy about their use in health environment. Methods: We asked 60 intensive care unit (ICU) HCPs from 2 units (the burn unit and the internal medicine unit) to participate in an electronic survey about mobile phone usage and hand hygiene compliance; we also cultured the hands and mobile phones of the participants. Unfortunately, 13 HCPs did not participate. Susceptibility testing of the strains was conducted, as well as molecular testing. Results: Overall, 47 HCPs responded to the inquiry: 19% were nurses (9 of 47), 19% were resident physicians (9 of 47), 17% were nursery technicians (8 of 47), 17% were physiotherapists (8 of 47), 13% were cleaning staff (6 of 47), 11% were consultants (5 of 47), and 4% were technicians (2 of 47). Moreover, 26 of 47 participants (55%) were woman and 21 (45%) were men. From all HCP categories, 39 of 47 respondents (83%) reported that they had optimal hand hygiene compliance. However, 92% of respondents had a colonized hand and 90% had a colonized mobile phone. Also, 44 of 47 HCPs (94%) reported that the took their personal mobile phone into the workplace; 40 (85%) reported that they used it during the work day and 35 (74%) reported that they cleaned it. However, 8 HCPs (26%) reported that they had never cleaned the device. All of the HCPs understood that mobile phones can harbor bacteria, and 27 of 47 HCPs (57.45%) indicated that they use 70% alcohol to clean their mobile phones. In contrast, the first choice for hand hygiene was water and soap in 51% of HCPs (24 of 47). Also, 3 HCPs did not have any colonization in the hand culture but had healthcare-associated infection (HAI) pathogens in the mobile phone culture. Conclusions: A policy regarding mobile phone usage in the healthcare setting should be in place, and cleaning of electronic devices in hospitals should be standardized.Funding: NoneDisclosures: NoneFunding: NoneDisclosures: None


2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Madeline Sands ◽  
Alexander M. Aiken ◽  
Oliver Cumming ◽  
Robert Aunger

Abstract Background Hand hygiene is a critical behaviour for infection control but efforts to raise compliance among clinical professionals have been met with mixed success. The aim of this systematic review was to identify the effectiveness of the behaviour change techniques utilised in recent hand hygiene interventions that seek to improve hand hygiene compliance among nurses in hospitals in high-income countries. Nurses are at the frontline of healthcare delivery, and so improving their HH behaviour and thus increasing HHC rates will have a relatively large impact on reducing transmission and preventing healthcare acquired infections. Methods High-quality studies among nurses in high-income countries were surveyed from the scientific literature, following PRISMA guidelines, to identify which kinds of behaviour change mechanisms have been used to effectively increase hand hygiene compliance. Only seven studies met all inclusion criteria. A formal meta-analysis was not conducted due to the heterogeneity of the included studies. Instead, the review analysed studies in line with the Intervention Component Analysis approach to identify which differences in intervention characteristics appear to be important. Analysis proceeded in two steps: first, the Effective Practice and Organization of Care Data Extraction Checklist was used to identify the study design and to describe the intervention, target population, setting, results, outcome measures, and analytic approach. The second step involved inferring the behavioural change techniques used in the complex study interventions. Following coding, logic models were then inferred for each study to identify the Theory of Change behind each intervention. These Theories of Change were then examined for suggestions as to which BCTs were likely to have been responsible for any effectiveness observed. Results Goals and planning (to achieve specific ends), comparison of behaviour (to peers or some ideal) and feedback and monitoring (observing and providing feedback about behaviour or outcomes) were the most frequently used behaviour change technique groupings used across studies and within interventions. Conclusion The complexity of the interventions used and lack of sufficient studies makes assignment of responsibility for behaviour change to specific behaviour change techniques difficult. Delivery channels and activities identified in the study Theories of Change were also highly individualized and so difficult to compare. However, we identified a temporal shift in types of techniques used in these recent studies on HH interventions, as compared with studies from prior to the review period. These newer interventions did not focus on providing access to alcohol-based hand rub or trying to solely encourage administrative support. Instead, they had nurses create goals and plan how to best facilitate HH, compared both individuals’ and the group’s behaviour to others, and focused on providing feedback.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document