Dataset Information

Hand Areas Which Are Commonly Missed during Hand Disinfection by Nursing Students Who Completed a Basic Educational Course in Hand Hygiene.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Teaching nursing students how to correctly perform hand hygiene procedures may guarantee a reduction in transmitting pathogens through direct contact and, thus, it may lead to a decrease in the number of hospital infections. The aim of the study, which was conducted in low fidelity simulation conditions, was to assess the performance and the efficiency of a hand-rubbing disinfection technique among nursing students on the last day of their course.

Materials and methods

The study was conducted in a group of 190 nursing students studying at the Jagiellonian University and it focused on the performed hand-rubbing disinfection procedure. The accuracy of the task performance was assessed by measuring the percentage of the amount of Fluo-Rub (B. Braun) fluorescent alcohol-based gel remaining on students' hands after disinfection. The gel was rubbed into particular hand parts including four surfaces (left palm, right palm, left back and right back) divided into thirteen areas (I-XIII) and each surface was examined separately. The results were then dichotomized based on the cut-off point of 10% and two categories: "clean" and "dirty" were established. Additionally, the range of negligence in the disinfection procedure was assessed by counting the total number of the areas classified as "dirty". The comparison of continuous and categorical variables was conducted by means of Friedman's and Cochrane's tests, respectively.

Results

It was found out that the palm surfaces that were commonly missed during hand disinfection included the whole thumb (I and VI), the fingertip of the little finger (V) and the midpalm (XIII), whereas in the case of back surfaces (on both right and left hand) the most commonly missed areas were the fingertips and the whole thumb I-VI. Only 30 students (13%) had all 52 areas of both hands completely clean, whereas more than one third-66 students (33%)-failed to disinfect properly more than 10 areas out of all assessed ones on the surfaces of both hands.

Conclusions

In the examined group of nursing students, a significant lack of compliance with hand disinfection procedures was observed and it was related mainly to thumbs and back parts of both hands. Therefore, it is essential to conduct systematic training sessions and assessment of hand hygiene procedures for nursing students at the end of every educational stage as it can lead to their developing these skills properly.

SUBMITTER: Gniadek A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7967523 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Helping adults and children develop better hygiene habits is an important public health focus. As infection causing bacteria can live on one's body and in the surrounding environment, more effective interventions should simultaneously encourage personal-hygiene (e.g. hand-hygiene) and environmental-disinfecting (e.g. cleaning surfaces). To inform the development of a future multi-faceted intervention to improve public health, a systematic literature review was conducted on behavior change interventions designed to increase hand-hygiene and environmental-disinfecting in settings likely to include children. METHODS:The search was conducted over two comprehensive data-bases, Ebsco Medline and Web of Science, to locate intervention studies that aimed to increase hand-hygiene or environmental-disinfecting behavior in settings likely to include children. Located article titles and abstracts were independently assessed, and the full-texts of agreed articles were collaboratively assessed for inclusion. Of the 2893 titles assessed, 29 met the eligibility criteria. The extracted data describe the Behavior Change Techniques (version 1) that the interventions employed and the interventions' effectiveness. The techniques were then linked to their associated theoretical domains and to their capability-opportunity-motivation (i.e., COM-B model) components, as described in the Behavior Change Wheel. Due to the heterogeneity of the studies' methods and measures, a meta-analysis was not conducted. RESULTS:A total of 29 studies met the inclusion criteria. The majority of interventions were designed to increase hand-hygiene alone (N =?27), and the remaining two interventions were designed to increase both hand-hygiene and environmental-disinfecting. The most used techniques involved shaping knowledge (N =?22) and antecedents (N =?21). Interventions that included techniques targeting four or more theoretical domains and all the capability-opportunity-motivation components were descriptively more effective. CONCLUSIONS:In alignment with previous findings, the current review encourages future interventions to target multiple theoretical domains, across all capability-opportunity-motivation components. The discussion urges interventionists to consider the appropriateness of interventions in their development, feasibility/pilot, evaluation, and implementation stages. REGISTRATION:Prospero ID - CRD42019133735.

Project description:BackgroundMissed nursing care is considered an error of omission and is defined as any aspect of required patient care that is omitted (either in part or whole) or significantly delayed. Nursing care missed in the perinatal setting can cause negative outcomes and repercussions for the quality and safety of care. This has been reported in multiple settings and countries and is tied to negative maternal outcomes. Preventing missed nursing care requires in-depth research considering the clinical setting.ObjectiveThe main aim of the study was to assess commonly missed nursing care elements, reasons, and factors for the omission in the obstetric and gynecologic units of general hospitals in Tigray 2017/18.Methods and materialsA cross-sectional study was conducted in eight randomly selected general hospitals in Tigray, Ethiopia. A total of 422 nurses and midwives were selected through simple random sampling using the staff list as a sampling frame. To identify the commonly missed nursing care and related factors, the MISSCARE survey tool was used. Descriptive, bivariate, and multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to assess potential risk factors of nursing cares omission.ResultThe study results showed that 299 (74.6%) participants commonly missed at least one nursing care in the perinatal setting. Labor resources 386(96.3%), teamwork 365(91%), material resources 361 (90%) and communication 342 (85.3%) were the reasons identified for commonly missing care. In the multivariate analyses, sex (p-value <0.001), educational level (p-value 0.034), working shift (p-value <0.001) and having an intention to leave the institution (p-value <0.001) showed a significant association with commonly missing care.ConclusionThe proportion of commonly missed nursing care was high. After adjusting for demographic variables, labor resources, material resources, and communication were reasons for commonly missed nursing care. Increasing male professional proportion, investing in nurses/midwives training, and harmonizing nursing service administration through appropriate working shift arrangement and timely assessment of professionals' stability and satisfaction could minimize frequent omission of nursing care.

Project description:BackgroundHand hygiene and low-level disinfection of equipment behaviors among hospital staff are some of the leading cost-effective methods to reduce hospital-acquired infections (HAI) among patients.ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to examine hand hygiene and low-level disinfection of equipment practices in a central Texas hospital and to explore pertaining gaps, perceptions, and challenges.MethodsData were collected using a multipronged mixed methods approach that included the following: (1) observation of hand hygiene and low-level disinfection practices (12 and 8 units during morning and evening shifts, respectively); (2) observation of usability/placement of hand sanitizer dispensers; (3) semistructured interviews; and (4) a follow-up email survey.ResultsIn total, 222 (156 morning shift and 66 evening shift) staff members were observed. Of 526 hand hygiene and 33 low-level disinfection opportunities, compliance was observed 410 (78%) and 17 (51%) times, respectively. Overall, 6 units (50%) had ≥0.80 (favorable) hand hygiene compliance during the morning shift and 2 units (25%) had ≥0.80 hand hygiene compliance during the evening shift. Aggregated low-level disinfection compliance was 0.54 during the morning and 0.33 during the evening. Overall, the odds of noncompliant hand hygiene behavior were 1.4 times higher among staff who worked during night shifts compared to day shifts; however, this relationship was not statistically significant (95% CI 0.86-2.18; P=.18). Noncompliant behavior was most likely among unit B staff during the evening; however, this relationship was not statistically significant (OR 5.3, 95% CI 0.84-32.9; P=.07) All units, except one, had similar hand sanitizer dispenser usability characteristics. In the qualitative part of the study, the following challenges were identified: "shortage of time while seeing patients," "sometimes the staff forgets," "concern about drying hands," "behavior is difficult or requires reminders," and "there may be issues with resources or access to supplies to perform these behaviors." Staff also stated that "a process that is considered effective is the Stop the Line program," and that the "behavior is easy and automatic."ConclusionsHand hygiene and low-level disinfection compliance is dependent on several personal and nonpersonal factors. Issues such as time constraints, peer pressure, work culture, available resources, and understanding of guidelines could influence staff behavior. The information collected through this study can be used to re-examine similar or related issues at a larger scale.

Project description:The German "Clean Hands Campaign" (an adaptation of the WHO "Clean Care is Safer Care" programme) to promote hand hygiene among hospital personnel at Hannover Medical School (MHH, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover), known as Aktion Saubere Hände (ASH), met with initial success. By 2013, however, compliance rates with hygienic hand disinfection in the hospital's ten intensive care units (ICUs) and two hematopoietic stem cell transplantation units (HSCTUs) had relapsed to their initial levels (physicians: 48%; nurses: 56%). The cluster- randomized controlled trial PSYGIENE was conducted to investigate whether interventions tai - lored in ways suggested by research in behavioral psychology might bring about more sustainable improvements than the ASH.The "Health Action Process Approach" (HAPA) compliance model specifies key psychological determinants of compliance. These determinants were assessed among health care workers in the ICUs and HSCTUs of the MHH by questionnaire (response rates: physicians: 71%; nurses: 63%) and by interviews of the responsible ward physicians and head nurses (100%). In 2013, 29 tailored behavior change techniques were implemented in educational training sessions and feedback discussions in the six wards that constituted the intervention arm of the trial, while ASH training sessions were provided in the control arm. The compliance rates for 2014 and 2015 (the primary outcomes of the trial) were determined by nonparticipating observation of hygienic hand disinfection, in accordance with the World Health Organization's gold standard.The two groups did not differ in their baseline compliance rates in 2013 (intervention: 54%, control: 55%, p = 0.581). The tailored interventions led to increased compliance in each of the two follow-up years (2014: 64%, p<0.001; 2015: 70%, p = 0.001), while the compliance in the control arm increased to 68% in 2014 (p<0.001) but fell back to 64% in 2015 (p = 0.007). The compliance increases from 2013-2015 and the compliance rate in 2015 were higher in the intervention arm (p<0.005). This was mainly attributable to the nurses' behavior, as the corresponding parameters for physicians did not differ significantly between the two study arms in stratified analysis.Tailored interventions based on behavioral psychology principles led to more sustainable increases in compliance with hand hygiene guidelines than ASH training sessions did. This was true among nurses, and thus also for hospital ward personnel as a whole (i.e., nurses and physicians combined). Further studies are needed to identify more target group-specific interventions that may improve compliance among physicians.

Project description:BackgroundImproving hand hygiene in hospitals is the most efficient method to prevent healthcare-associated infections. The hand hygiene behavior of hospital patients and visitors is not well-researched, although they pose a risk for the transmission of pathogens. Therefore, the present study had three aims: (1) Finding a suitable theoretical model to explain patients' and visitors' hand hygiene practice; (2) Identifying important predictors for their hand hygiene behavior; and (3) Comparing the essential determinants of hand hygiene behavior between healthcare professionals from the literature to our non-professional sample.MethodsIn total N = 1,605 patients and visitors were surveyed on their hand hygiene practice in hospitals. The employed questionnaires were based on three theoretical models: a) the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB); b) the Health Action Process Approach (HAPA); and c) the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Structural equation modeling was used to analyze the data. To compare our results to the determinants of healthcare workers' hand hygiene behavior, we searched for studies that used one of the three theoretical models.ResultsAmong patients, 52% of the variance in the hand hygiene behavior was accounted for by the TDF domains, 44% by a modified HAPA model, and 40% by the TPB factors. Among visitors, these figures were 59%, 37%, and 55%, respectively. Two clusters of variables surfaced as being essential determinants of behavior: self-regulatory processes and social influence processes. The critical determinants for healthcare professionals' hand hygiene reported in the literature were similar to the findings from our non-professional sample.ConclusionsThe TDF was identified as the most suitable model to explain patients' and visitors' hand hygiene practices. Patients and visitors should be included in existing behavior change intervention strategies. Newly planned interventions should focus on targeting self-regulatory and social influence processes to improve effectiveness.