OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility of using an electronic hand hygiene surveillance and feedback monitoring device. DESIGN: A 2-phase pilot study included initial direct observation of hand hygiene practices as part of routine hospital quality assurance (phase I) and subsequent monitoring using an electronic hand hygiene surveillance device (phase II). SETTING: A 700-bed tertiary care teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Phase I included a convenience sample of healthcare workers. Phase II included 7 medical interns and 7 registered nurses recruited through email and at work-related meetings. METHODS: During phase I, healthcare workers were directly observed at patient room entry and exit during the period April through November 2008. During phase II, hand hygiene data were gathered through indirect observation using the electronic device during a 4-week period in August 2009. Twenty patient rooms were fitted with electronic trigger devices that signaled a reader unit worn by participants when they entered the room, and 70 dispensers for liquid soap or hand sanitizer were fitted with triggers that signaled the reader unit when the dispenser was used. The accuracy of the devices was checked by the principal investigator, who manually recorded his room entries and exits and dispenser use while wearing a reader unit. RESULTS: During phase I, hand hygiene occurred before room entry for 95 (25.1%) and after room exit for 149 (39.4%) of 378 directly observed patient room visits, for a cumulative composite compliance rate of 32.3%. Among the 378 room visits, 347 (91.8%) involved contact with the patient and/or environment. During phase II, electronic monitoring revealed a cumulative composite compliance rate of 25.5%. The electronic device captured 61 (98%) of 62 manually recorded room entries and 133 (95%) of 140 manually recorded dispensing events. CONCLUSIONS: The electronic hand hygiene surveillance device seems to be a practical method for routinely monitoring hand hygiene compliance in healthcare workers.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility of using an electronic hand hygiene surveillance and feedback monitoring device. DESIGN: A 2-phase pilot study included initial direct observation of hand hygiene practices as part of routine hospital quality assurance (phase I) and subsequent monitoring using an electronic hand hygiene surveillance device (phase II). SETTING: A 700-bed tertiary care teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Phase I included a convenience sample of healthcare workers. Phase II included 7 medical interns and 7 registered nurses recruited through email and at work-related meetings. METHODS: During phase I, healthcare workers were directly observed at patient room entry and exit during the period April through November 2008. During phase II, hand hygiene data were gathered through indirect observation using the electronic device during a 4-week period in August 2009. Twenty patient rooms were fitted with electronic trigger devices that signaled a reader unit worn by participants when they entered the room, and 70 dispensers for liquid soap or hand sanitizer were fitted with triggers that signaled the reader unit when the dispenser was used. The accuracy of the devices was checked by the principal investigator, who manually recorded his room entries and exits and dispenser use while wearing a reader unit. RESULTS: During phase I, hand hygiene occurred before room entry for 95 (25.1%) and after room exit for 149 (39.4%) of 378 directly observed patient room visits, for a cumulative composite compliance rate of 32.3%. Among the 378 room visits, 347 (91.8%) involved contact with the patient and/or environment. During phase II, electronic monitoring revealed a cumulative composite compliance rate of 25.5%. The electronic device captured 61 (98%) of 62 manually recorded room entries and 133 (95%) of 140 manually recorded dispensing events. CONCLUSIONS: The electronic hand hygiene surveillance device seems to be a practical method for routinely monitoring hand hygiene compliance in healthcare workers.
Authors: Lisa L Pineles; Daniel J Morgan; Heather M Limper; Stephen G Weber; Kerri A Thom; Eli N Perencevich; Anthony D Harris; Emily Landon Journal: Am J Infect Control Date: 2013-12-17 Impact factor: 2.918
Authors: Vincent C C Cheng; Josepha W M Tai; Sara K Y Ho; Jasper F W Chan; Kwan Ngai Hung; Pak Leung Ho; Kwok Yung Yuen Journal: BMC Infect Dis Date: 2011-05-26 Impact factor: 3.090