A user's view of commercial mobile applications designed to measure hand hygiene compliance by direct observation

Cawthorne, Katie-Rose; Oliver, Clare; Cooke, R.P.D.

doi:10.1016/j.jhin.2021.08.008

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We identified methods including direct study of behaviours by trained observers, video observation, automated technology, and the use of newly developed technology using AI and machine learning in place of an observer. The use of such technology has been demonstrated with face covering wearing studies, as well as studies that measure crowd density with social distancing within the crowd data [ 85 , 86 , 87 ]. These techniques all have their pros and cons in terms of intrusiveness, cost, capacity, ability to identify behaviours that may be partially obscured and so on.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review of observational methods used to quantify personal protective behaviours among members of the public during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the concordance between observational and self-report measures in infectious disease health protection

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To assess the quantity and quality of studies using an observational measure of behaviour during the COVID-19 pandemic, and to narratively describe the association between self-report and observational data for behaviours relevant to controlling an infectious disease outbreak. Design Systematic review and narrative synthesis of observational studies. Data sources We searched Medline, Embase, PsychInfo, Publons, Scopus and the UK Health Security Agency behavioural science LitRep database from inception to 17th September 2021 for relevant studies. Study selection We included studies which collected observational data of at least one of three health protective behaviours (hand hygiene, face covering use and maintaining physical distance from others (‘social distancing’) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Studies where observational data were compared to self-report data in relation to any infectious disease were also included. Data extraction and synthesis We evaluated the quality of studies using the NIH quality assessment scale for observational studies, extracted data on sample size, setting and adherence to health protective behaviours, and synthesized results narratively. Results Of 27,279 published papers on COVID-19 relevant health protective behaviours that included one or more terms relating to hand hygiene, face covering and social distancing, we identified 48 studies that included an objective observational measure. Of these, 35 assessed face covering use, 17 assessed hand hygiene behaviour and seven assessed physical distancing. The general quality of these studies was good. When expanding the search to all infectious diseases, we included 21 studies that compared observational versus self-report data. These almost exclusively studied hand hygiene. The difference in outcomes was striking, with self-report over-estimating observed adherence by up to a factor of five in some settings. In only four papers did self-report match observational data in any domains. Conclusions Despite their importance in controlling the pandemic, we found remarkably few studies assessing protective behaviours by observation, rather than self-report, though these studies tended to be of reasonably good quality. Observed adherence tends to be substantially lower than estimates obtained via self-report. Accurate assessment of levels of personal protective behaviour, and evaluation of interventions to increase this, would benefit from the use of observational methods.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review of observational methods used to quantify personal protective behaviours among members of the public during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the concordance between observational and self-report measures in infectious disease health protection

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We identified methods including direct study of behaviours by trained observers, video observation, automated technology, and the use of newly developed technology using AI and machine learning in place of an observer. The use of such technology has been demonstrated with face covering wearing studies, as well as studies that measure crowd density with social distancing within the crowd data 88, 89, 90 . These techniques all have their pros and cons in terms of intrusiveness, cost, capacity, ability to identify behaviours that may be partially obscured and so on.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review of observational methods used to quantify personal protective behaviours among members of the public during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the concordance between observational and self-report measures in infectious disease health protection

Davies

Mowbray

Martin

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: To assess the quantity and quality of studies using an observational measure of behaviour during the COVID-19 pandemic, and to narratively describe the association between self-report and observational data for behaviours relevant to controlling an infectious disease outbreak. Design: Systematic review and narrative synthesis of observational studies. Data sources: We searched Medline, Embase, PsychInfo, Publons, Scopus and the Public Health England behavioural science LitRep database from inception to 17th September 2021 for relevant studies. Study selection: We included studies which collected observational data of at least one of three health protective behaviours (hand hygiene, face covering use and maintaining physical distance from others (social distancing) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Studies where observational data were compared to self-report data in relation to any infectious disease were also included. Data extraction and synthesis: We evaluated the quality of studies using the NIH quality assessment scale for observational studies, extracted data on sample size, setting and adherence to health protective behaviours, and synthesized results narratively. Results: Of 27,279 published papers on COVID-19 relevant health protective behaviours that included one or more terms relating to hand hygiene, face covering and social distancing, we identified 48 studies that included an objective observational measure. Of these, 35 assessed face covering use, 17 assessed hand hygiene behaviour and seven assessed physical distancing. The general quality of these studies was good. When expanding the search to all infectious diseases, we included 21 studies that compared observational versus self-report data. These almost exclusively studied hand hygiene. The difference in outcomes was striking, with self-report over-estimating observed adherence by up to a factor of five in some settings. In only four papers did self-report match observational data in any domains. Conclusions: Despite their importance in controlling the pandemic, we found remarkably few studies assessing protective behaviours by observation, rather than self-report, though these studies tended to be of reasonably good quality. Observed adherence tends to be substantially lower than estimates obtained via self-report. Accurate assessment of levels of personal protective behaviour, and evaluation of interventions to increase this, would benefit from the use of observational methods.

show abstract

“…These methods still employ direct observers but there is a marked reduction in the time spent on the transcription of data, as well as decrease the risk of introduction of errors in the analysis. ( Cawthorne et al, 2021 ; Wang et al, 2021 ). Despite its potential, AADO technology is met with numerous challenge and limitations, the most prominent of which is its non-user-friendly nature and subsequent intensive training needed to be done for HCWs ( Cawthorne et al, 2021 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…( Cawthorne et al, 2021 ; Wang et al, 2021 ). Despite its potential, AADO technology is met with numerous challenge and limitations, the most prominent of which is its non-user-friendly nature and subsequent intensive training needed to be done for HCWs ( Cawthorne et al, 2021 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Going Electronic: Venturing Into Electronic Monitoring Systems to Increase Hand Hygiene Compliance in Philippine Healthcare

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A user's view of commercial mobile applications designed to measure hand hygiene compliance by direct observation

Cited by 4 publications

References 14 publications

A systematic review of observational methods used to quantify personal protective behaviours among members of the public during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the concordance between observational and self-report measures in infectious disease health protection

A systematic review of observational methods used to quantify personal protective behaviours among members of the public during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the concordance between observational and self-report measures in infectious disease health protection

A systematic review of observational methods used to quantify personal protective behaviours among members of the public during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the concordance between observational and self-report measures in infectious disease health protection

Going Electronic: Venturing Into Electronic Monitoring Systems to Increase Hand Hygiene Compliance in Philippine Healthcare

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About