Lisa L Pineles1, Daniel J Morgan2, Heather M Limper3, Stephen G Weber3, Kerri A Thom4, Eli N Perencevich5, Anthony D Harris4, Emily Landon3. 1. Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD. Electronic address: lpineles@epi.umaryland.edu. 2. Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD; VA Maryland Health Care System, Baltimore, MD. 3. Department of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL. 4. Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD. 5. Iowa City VA Health Care System and Divisions of General Internal Medicine and Infectious Diseases, Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, IA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hand hygiene (HH) is a critical part of infection prevention in health care settings. Hospitals around the world continuously struggle to improve health care personnel (HCP) HH compliance. The current gold standard for monitoring compliance is direct observation; however, this method is time-consuming and costly. One emerging area of interest involves automated systems for monitoring HH behavior such as radiofrequency identification (RFID) tracking systems. METHODS: To assess the accuracy of a commercially available RFID system in detecting HCP HH behavior, we compared direct observation with data collected by the RFID system in a simulated validation setting and to a real-life clinical setting over 2 hospitals. RESULTS: A total of 1,554 HH events was observed. Accuracy for identifying HH events was high in the simulated validation setting (88.5%) but relatively low in the real-life clinical setting (52.4%). This difference was significant (P < .01). Accuracy for detecting HCP movement into and out of patient rooms was also high in the simulated setting but not in the real-life clinical setting (100% on entry and exit in simulated setting vs 54.3% entry and 49.5% exit in real-life clinical setting, P < .01). CONCLUSION: In this validation study of an RFID system, almost half of the HH events were missed. More research is necessary to further develop these systems and improve accuracy prior to widespread adoption.
BACKGROUND: Hand hygiene (HH) is a critical part of infection prevention in health care settings. Hospitals around the world continuously struggle to improve health care personnel (HCP) HH compliance. The current gold standard for monitoring compliance is direct observation; however, this method is time-consuming and costly. One emerging area of interest involves automated systems for monitoring HH behavior such as radiofrequency identification (RFID) tracking systems. METHODS: To assess the accuracy of a commercially available RFID system in detecting HCP HH behavior, we compared direct observation with data collected by the RFID system in a simulated validation setting and to a real-life clinical setting over 2 hospitals. RESULTS: A total of 1,554 HH events was observed. Accuracy for identifying HH events was high in the simulated validation setting (88.5%) but relatively low in the real-life clinical setting (52.4%). This difference was significant (P < .01). Accuracy for detecting HCP movement into and out of patient rooms was also high in the simulated setting but not in the real-life clinical setting (100% on entry and exit in simulated setting vs 54.3% entry and 49.5% exit in real-life clinical setting, P < .01). CONCLUSION: In this validation study of an RFID system, almost half of the HH events were missed. More research is necessary to further develop these systems and improve accuracy prior to widespread adoption.
Authors: Philip M Polgreen; Christopher S Hlady; Monica A Severson; Alberto M Segre; Ted Herman Journal: Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol Date: 2010-10-25 Impact factor: 3.254
Authors: Katherine Ellingson; Philip M Polgreen; Amy Schneider; Laura Shinkunas; Lauris C Kaldjian; Donald Wright; Geb W Thomas; Alberto M Segre; Ted Herman; L Clifford McDonald; Ronda Sinkowitz-Cochran Journal: Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol Date: 2011-09-20 Impact factor: 3.254
Authors: Andrew G Sahud; Nitin Bhanot; Anita Radhakrishnan; Rajinder Bajwa; Harish Manyam; James Christopher Post Journal: Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol Date: 2010-06 Impact factor: 3.254
Authors: Daniel J Morgan; Lisa Pineles; Michelle Shardell; Atlisa Young; Katherine Ellingson; John A Jernigan; Hannah R Day; Kerri A Thom; Anthony D Harris; Eli N Perencevich Journal: Am J Infect Control Date: 2012-05-26 Impact factor: 2.918
Authors: Phillip D Levin; Reut Razon; Carmela Schwartz; Alexander Avidan; Charles L Sprung; Allon E Moses; Shmuel Benenson Journal: Antimicrob Resist Infect Control Date: 2019-02-22 Impact factor: 4.887
Authors: Amit Singh; Albert Haque; Alexandre Alahi; Serena Yeung; Michelle Guo; Jill R Glassman; William Beninati; Terry Platchek; Li Fei-Fei; Arnold Milstein Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2020-08-01 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Kevin M Overmann; Danny T Y Wu; Catherine T Xu; Shwetha S Bindhu; Lindsey Barrick Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2021-06-12 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Heleen M Essink; Armelle Knops; Amber M A Liqui Lung; C Nienke van der Meulen; Nino L Wouters; Aart J van der Molen; Wouter J H Veldkamp; M Frank Termaat Journal: Sensors (Basel) Date: 2020-07-15 Impact factor: 3.576