Improved hand hygiene technique and compliance in healthcare workers using gaming technology

Higgins, Ann; Hannan, Margaret M.

doi:10.1016/j.jhin.2013.02.004

Cited by 65 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Other studies have described the evaluation of HH quality using a fluorescent substance and adenosine triphosphate technology [5][6][7]. Pan SC [5] identifies the tips of the nail and the fingertips as the most common residue points after application of a fluorescent substance, and Szilagi L et al [6] identified a failure to clean the dorsal and palmar areas in 24 and 18% of the instances.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of hand hygiene techniques using the World Health Organization's six steps

Arias

Garcell

Ochoa

et al. 2016

Journal of Infection and Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The quality of hand hygiene was evaluated via direct observation for compliance with the six recommended World Health Organization steps. A total of 2497 HH opportunities, of which 1573 (63.0%) were hand rubs, were monitored over a five month period. Compliance was higher in nurses compared with physicians and auxiliaries and in steps 1 and 2 for hand rubs as well as the first three steps of hand washing, with lower rates after these steps. Rubbing of the thumbs and fingertips achieved the lowest rates of compliance in both HH types. A combination of the five recommended moments and six steps and staff education is recommended to improve the quality of hand hygiene.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of hand hygiene techniques using the World Health Organization's six steps

Arias

Garcell

Ochoa

et al. 2016

Journal of Infection and Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The consistent application of infection prevention measures is essential and since Pittet et al's (2000) seminal piece of work where hand hygiene adherence increased following a multi-faceted campaign, hand hygiene has become a core component for reducing HCAIs. However despite an increased awareness and the implementation of a range of interventions, Higgins and Hannan (2013) conclude that the healthcare profession still struggles with hand hygiene adherence in the 21st century.An inordinate amount of energy and resources have gone into improving hand hygiene adherence, with some success; intervention studies have reported sustained increases in adherence (Pittet et al, 2000;Huang et al, 2002; Huggonet et al, 2002;Randle et al, 2006;Higgins and Hannan, 2013) and a systematic review concluded that multifaceted approaches that provide education with written information, reminders and continuous performance feedback had been considered to be more effective than approaches involving a single type of intervention (Naikoba and Hayward, 2001). However, a more recent systematic review conducted by Gould et al (2007) concluded that there is little robust evidence to suggest that any interventions are effective in the long term.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

An observational study of hand hygiene adherence following the introduction of an education intervention

Randle

Arthur

Vaughan

et al. 2014

Journal of Infection Prevention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Peer reviewed article and hygiene adherence needs to be increased and sustained in order to prevent and reduce healthcare associated infections. We implemented an educational intervention and observed the adherence of healthcare workers, patients and visitors over 24 hour periods at four observation points. For healthcare workers a total of 2,294 opportunities were observed and for patients and visitors, a total of 597 opportunities were observed. Healthcare worker adherence increased following the introduction of the educational intervention, with 53.0% (282/532) adherence at baseline (observation point 1), and was sustained varying between 67.7% and 70.8% in the post-intervention points (p=0.0007). The greatest increase in adherence was observed between baseline and the observation point 2. Adherence varied according to type of opportunity (p<0.0001) with the lowest level of adherence observed after contact with patient surroundings, however there was no obvious trend across the observation points. There was an interaction between point of study and ward (p=0.0001). For patients and visitors, adherence did differ according to the point of study (p=0.0074) with adherence prior to the intervention being 49.1% and then ranging from 43.5-61.8%. We suggest that future educational interventions should be implemented as this study implies that there is potential for increased and sustained adherence to hand hygiene protocols. IntroductionHealthcare associated infections (HCAIs) are a concern for patients, healthcare workers (HCWs), healthcare providers and politicians (Hospital Infection Society/ICNA, 2007). The consistent application of infection prevention measures is essential and since Pittet et al's (2000) seminal piece of work where hand hygiene adherence increased following a multi-faceted campaign, hand hygiene has become a core component for reducing HCAIs. However despite an increased awareness and the implementation of a range of interventions, Higgins and Hannan (2013) conclude that the healthcare profession still struggles with hand hygiene adherence in the 21st century.An inordinate amount of energy and resources have gone into improving hand hygiene adherence, with some success; intervention studies have reported sustained increases in adherence (Pittet et al, 2000;Huang et al, 2002; Huggonet et al, 2002;Randle et al, 2006;Higgins and Hannan, 2013) and a systematic review concluded that multifaceted approaches that provide education with written information, reminders and continuous performance feedback had been considered to be more effective than approaches involving a single type of intervention (Naikoba and Hayward, 2001). However, a more recent systematic review conducted by Gould et al (2007) concluded that there is little robust evidence to suggest that any interventions are effective in the long term. Methods Study designThis was an observational study of the hand hygiene adherence of HCWs, patients and visitors before and after the introduction of an educational intervention. The study was con...

show abstract

“…Using a less strict definition of complete hand hygiene action (1 second for each pose), the pass rate for hand hygiene actions increased modestly from 62.5% to 64.7% (p<0.05). Higgins et al used the SureWash device as part of an institution-wide multimodal hand hygiene promotion campaign [16]. The pass rate for handwashing (rather than hand rubbing) technique using adenosine triphosphate monitoring increased from 52% before implementation of training with SureWash to 79% after (p<0.001).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy of a New Educational Tool to Improve Handrubbing Technique amongst Healthcare Workers: A Controlled, Before-After Study

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionHand hygiene is a key component of infection control in healthcare. WHO recommends that healthcare workers perform six specific poses during each hand hygiene action. SureWash (Glanta Ltd, Dublin, Ireland) is a novel device that uses video-measurement technology and immediate feedback to teach this technique. We assessed the impact of self-directed SureWash use on healthcare worker hand hygiene technique and evaluated the device's diagnostic capacity.MethodsA controlled before-after study: subjects in Group A were exposed to the SureWash for four weeks followed by Group B for 12 weeks. Each subject's hand hygiene technique was assessed by blinded observers at baseline (T0) and following intervention periods (T1 and T2). Primary outcome was performance of a complete hand hygiene action, requiring all six poses during an action lasting ≥20 seconds. The number of poses per hand hygiene action (maximum 6) was assessed in a post-hoc analysis. SureWash's diagnostic capacity compared to human observers was assessed using ROC curve analysis.ResultsThirty-four and 29 healthcare workers were recruited to groups A and B, respectively. No participants performed a complete action at baseline. At T1, one Group A participant and no Group B participants performed a complete action. At baseline, the median number of poses performed per action was 2.0 and 1.0 in Groups A and B, respectively (p = 0.12). At T1, the number of poses per action was greater in Group A (post-intervention) than Group B (control): median 3.8 and 2.0, respectively (p<0.001). In Group A, the number of poses performed twelve weeks post-intervention (median 3.0) remained higher than baseline (p<0.001). The area under the ROC curves for the 6 poses ranged from 0.59 to 0.88.DiscussionWhile no impact on complete actions was demonstrated, SureWash significantly increased the number of poses per hand hygiene action and demonstrated good diagnostic capacity.

show abstract

Improved hand hygiene technique and compliance in healthcare workers using gaming technology

Cited by 65 publications

References 13 publications

Assessment of hand hygiene techniques using the World Health Organization's six steps

Assessment of hand hygiene techniques using the World Health Organization's six steps

An observational study of hand hygiene adherence following the introduction of an education intervention

Efficacy of a New Educational Tool to Improve Handrubbing Technique amongst Healthcare Workers: A Controlled, Before-After Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About