Despite the mandated use of standard precaution guidelines to limit infection transmission in health‐care settings, adherence by health‐care professionals is suboptimal. There is currently no psychometrically‐validated scale to assess influences on workers' adherence. After the data collection was conducted, Michinov et al. (2016) published a questionnaire to determine sociocognitive determinants of adherence to Standard Precautions. The aim of the present study was to develop and test the psychometric properties of such a scale. Forty nine items were derived from interviews with 29 nurses and tested across two studies. Study 1 was a repeated‐measures survey using principal components analysis with data from 363 participants; a 29 item, five factor solution was extracted with good to acceptable internal reliabilities (α = .61–.85). Data from 122 of the original participants retested at 4 weeks showed intraclass correlations of .69–.84. Study 2, which was 6 months later, used confirmatory factor analysis with data from a second sample of 384 participants, and supported the five factor structure of leadership, justification, culture/practice, contextual cues, and judgement. The Factors Influencing Adherence to Standard Precautions Scale has good psychometric properties and stability across time and samples. The scale is suitable for use with nurses, and its validation with other health‐care professionals and trainees is important in order to tailor effective interventions to promote adherence.

No abstract

No abstract

Aim One of the greatest challenges in responding to the COVID‐19 pandemic is preventing staff exposure and infection by ensuring consistent and effective use of personal protective equipment (PPE). This study explored health care workers' experience of prolonged PPE use in clinical practice settings and their concerns regarding PPE supply, effectiveness and training needs. Design A descriptive cross‐sectional design was adopted in this study. Methods Health care workers ( N = 592) from an acute care hospital completed an online survey from July to September 2020 assessing: (i) usage frequencies, side effects and interference with patient care; and (ii) perceptions of access to PPE, likelihood of exposure to infection and adequacy of PPE training. Results PPE‐related side effects were reported by 319 (53.8%) participants, the majority being nurses (88.4%) and those working in high‐risk areas such as the emergency department (39.5%), respiratory wards (acute 22.3% and non‐acute 23.8%) and COVID‐19 isolation ward (13.8%). The average time wearing PPE per shift was 6.8 h ( SD 0.39). The most commonly reported symptoms were from donning N95 masks and included: pressure injuries (45.5%), mask‐induced acne (40.4%) and burning/pain (24.5%). Some 31.3% expressed that PPE‐related side effects had negatively affected their work. The odds of having PPE‐associated side effects was higher in women (OR 2.10, 95% CI [1.29–03.42], p = .003) and those working in high‐risk wards (OR 3.12, 95% CI [2.17–4.60], p < .001]. Most (90.1%) agreed that PPE supplies were readily available, sufficient for all (86.1%) and there was sufficient training in correct PPE use (93.6%). Only 13.7% of participants reported being ‘highly confident’ of overall PPE protection. Conclusions Prevention and management of PPE‐related adverse effects is vital to: preserve the integrity of PPE, improve adherence and minimize viral transmission. Impact The high incidence of PPE‐associated pressure injuries and perception that PPE use can interfere with clinical care should inform future development of PPE products, and strategies to better equip health care workers to prevent and manage PPE‐related side effects.

No abstract