Giorgia Gon1, Abdunoor M Kabanywanyi2, Petri Blinkhoff3, Simon Cousens3, Stephanie J Dancer4,5, Wendy J Graham3, Joseph Hokororo6, Fatuma Manzi2, Tanya Marchant7, Dickson Mkoka8, Emma Morrison9, Sarah Mswata2, Shefali Oza3, Loveday Penn-Kekana3, Yovitha Sedekia2, Sandra Virgo10, Susannah Woodd3, Alexander M Aiken3. 1. Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK. giorgia.gon@lshtm.ac.uk. 2. Ifakara Health Institute, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. 3. Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK. 4. School of Applied Sciences, Edinburgh Napier University, Edinburgh, UK. 5. Department of Microbiology, Hairmyres Hospital, Glasgow, UK. 6. Ministry of Health Community Development Gender Elderly and Children, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. 7. Department of Disease Control, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. 8. School of Nursing, Muhimbili University of Health and Allied Sciences, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. 9. The Soapbox Collaborative, Aberdeen, UK. 10. Kent University, Canterbury, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Healthcare associated infections (HAI) are estimated to affect up to 15% of hospital inpatients in low-income countries (LICs). A critical but often neglected aspect of HAI prevention is basic environmental hygiene, particularly surface cleaning and linen management. TEACH CLEAN is an educational intervention aimed at improving environmental hygiene. We evaluated the effectiveness of this intervention in a pilot study in three high-volume maternity and newborn units in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. METHODS: This study design prospectively evaluated the intervention as a whole, and offered a before-and-after comparison of the impact of the main training. We measured changes in microbiological cleanliness [Aerobic Colony Counts (ACC) and presence of Staphylococcus aureus] using dipslides, and physical cleaning action using gel dots. These were analysed with descriptive statistics and logistic regression models. We used qualitative (focus group discussions, in-depth interviews, and semi-structured observation) and quantitative (observation checklist) tools to measure why and how the intervention worked. We describe these findings across the themes of adaptation, fidelity, dose, reach and context. RESULTS: Microbiological cleanliness improved during the study period (ACC pre-training: 19%; post-training: 41%). The odds of cleanliness increased on average by 1.33 weekly during the pre-training period (CI = 1.11-1.60), and by 1.08 (CI = 1.03-1.13) during the post-training period. Cleaning action improved only in the pre-training period. Detection of S. aureus on hospital surfaces did not change substantially. The intervention was well received and considered feasible in this context. The major pitfalls in the implementation were the limited number of training sessions at the hospital level and the lack of supportive supervision. A systems barrier to implementation was lack of regular cleaning supplies. CONCLUSIONS: The evaluation suggests that improvements in microbiological cleanliness are possible using this intervention and can be sustained. Improved microbiological cleanliness is a key step on the pathway to infection prevention in hospitals. Future research should assess whether this bundle is cost-effective in reducing bacterial and viral transmission and infection using a rigorous study design.
BACKGROUND: Healthcare associated infections (HAI) are estimated to affect up to 15% of hospital inpatients in low-income countries (LICs). A critical but often neglected aspect of HAI prevention is basic environmental hygiene, particularly surface cleaning and linen management. TEACH CLEAN is an educational intervention aimed at improving environmental hygiene. We evaluated the effectiveness of this intervention in a pilot study in three high-volume maternity and newborn units in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. METHODS: This study design prospectively evaluated the intervention as a whole, and offered a before-and-after comparison of the impact of the main training. We measured changes in microbiological cleanliness [Aerobic Colony Counts (ACC) and presence of Staphylococcus aureus] using dipslides, and physical cleaning action using gel dots. These were analysed with descriptive statistics and logistic regression models. We used qualitative (focus group discussions, in-depth interviews, and semi-structured observation) and quantitative (observation checklist) tools to measure why and how the intervention worked. We describe these findings across the themes of adaptation, fidelity, dose, reach and context. RESULTS: Microbiological cleanliness improved during the study period (ACC pre-training: 19%; post-training: 41%). The odds of cleanliness increased on average by 1.33 weekly during the pre-training period (CI = 1.11-1.60), and by 1.08 (CI = 1.03-1.13) during the post-training period. Cleaning action improved only in the pre-training period. Detection of S. aureus on hospital surfaces did not change substantially. The intervention was well received and considered feasible in this context. The major pitfalls in the implementation were the limited number of training sessions at the hospital level and the lack of supportive supervision. A systems barrier to implementation was lack of regular cleaning supplies. CONCLUSIONS: The evaluation suggests that improvements in microbiological cleanliness are possible using this intervention and can be sustained. Improved microbiological cleanliness is a key step on the pathway to infection prevention in hospitals. Future research should assess whether this bundle is cost-effective in reducing bacterial and viral transmission and infection using a rigorous study design.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cleaning; Environmental hygiene; Intervention; Maternity; Pilot; Training
Authors: Philip C Carling; Michael M Parry; Mark E Rupp; John L Po; Brian Dick; Sandra Von Beheren Journal: Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol Date: 2008-11 Impact factor: 3.254
Authors: Giorgia Gon; Said M Ali; Catriona Towriss; Catherine Kahabuka; Ali O Ali; Sue Cavill; Mohammed Dahoma; Sally Faulkner; Haji S Haji; Ibrahim Kabole; Emma Morrison; Rukaiya M Said; Amour Tajo; Yael Velleman; Susannah L Woodd; And Wendy J Graham Journal: Health Policy Plan Date: 2017-10-01 Impact factor: 3.344
Authors: Angie Sway; Peter Nthumba; Joseph Solomkin; Giorgio Tarchini; Ronald Gibbs; Yanhan Ren; Anthony Wanyoro Journal: Int J Womens Health Date: 2019-05-09
Authors: Giorgia Gon; Lucia Dansero; Alexander M Aiken; Christian Bottomley; Stephanie J Dancer; Wendy J Graham; Olivia C Ike; Michelle Lewis; Nick Meakin; Obiora Okafor; Nkolika S Uwaezuoke; Tochi Joy Okwor Journal: Microorganisms Date: 2022-04-26
Authors: Mwaka A Kakolwa; Susannah L Woodd; Alexander M Aiken; Fatuma Manzi; Giorgia Gon; Wendy J Graham; Abdunoor M Kabanywanyi Journal: Antimicrob Resist Infect Control Date: 2021-10-09 Impact factor: 4.887
Authors: Susannah L Woodd; Abdunoor M Kabanywanyi; Andrea M Rehman; Oona M R Campbell; Asila Kagambo; Warda Martiasi; Louise M TinaDay; Alexander M Aiken; Wendy J Graham Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-07-01 Impact factor: 3.240