Xiao Zhong1, Dong-Li Wang2, Li-Hua Xiao3, Lan-Fang Mo3, Qing-Fei Wu3, Yan-Wei Chen3, Xiao-Feng Luo3. 1. Department of Nosocomial Infection Control, Shenzhen Hospital, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen, 518106, Guangdong, China. 187197283@qq.com. 2. Inspection center, Guangming District Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Shenzhen, Guangdong, China. 3. Department of Nosocomial Infection Control, Shenzhen Hospital, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen, 518106, Guangdong, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hand hygiene (HH) is the cornerstone of infection control, and the promotion of HH is the focus of the world. The study aims to compare the role of two different types of electronic hand hygiene monitoring systems (EHHMSs) in promoting HH of healthcare workers (HCWs) in the intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: In a 16-bed ICU of a general tertiary hospital in Shenzhen, the research was divided into three stages with interrupted time series (ITS) design. In the first stage, the direct observation method was used to monitor and feed back the HH compliance rate of HCWs monthly. In the second stage, the type1 EHHMS was applied to monitor and feed back the individual number of HH events monthly. In the third stage, the type2 EHHMS with a function of instant reminder and feedback was employed, and the personal HH compliance rates were fed back monthly. Meanwhile, direct observation continued in the last two stages. RESULTS: In the second stage, The HH compliance rate increased. However, there was no significant difference in the trajectory of the rate compared with the first stage. In the first month of the third stage, the HH compliance rate increased by 12.324% immediately and then ascended by 1.242% over time. The number of HH events per bed day and HH products' consumption per bed day were consistent with the change of HH compliance rate observed. CONCLUSION: Monitoring and feedback can improve the HH of HCWs. The EHHMS, with the function of real-time reminders and feedback, has a more noticeable effect on promoting HH.
BACKGROUND: Hand hygiene (HH) is the cornerstone of infection control, and the promotion of HH is the focus of the world. The study aims to compare the role of two different types of electronic hand hygiene monitoring systems (EHHMSs) in promoting HH of healthcare workers (HCWs) in the intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: In a 16-bed ICU of a general tertiary hospital in Shenzhen, the research was divided into three stages with interrupted time series (ITS) design. In the first stage, the direct observation method was used to monitor and feed back the HH compliance rate of HCWs monthly. In the second stage, the type1 EHHMS was applied to monitor and feed back the individual number of HH events monthly. In the third stage, the type2 EHHMS with a function of instant reminder and feedback was employed, and the personal HH compliance rates were fed back monthly. Meanwhile, direct observation continued in the last two stages. RESULTS: In the second stage, The HH compliance rate increased. However, there was no significant difference in the trajectory of the rate compared with the first stage. In the first month of the third stage, the HH compliance rate increased by 12.324% immediately and then ascended by 1.242% over time. The number of HH events per bed day and HH products' consumption per bed day were consistent with the change of HH compliance rate observed. CONCLUSION: Monitoring and feedback can improve the HH of HCWs. The EHHMS, with the function of real-time reminders and feedback, has a more noticeable effect on promoting HH.
Entities:
Keywords:
Electronic hand hygiene monitoring systems; Hand hygiene; Infection prevent and control; Interrupted time series analyse; Reminder and feedback
Authors: Sarah A Stella; Roger J Stace; Bryan C Knepper; Sara M Reese; Angela Keniston; Marisha Burden; Heather L Young Journal: Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol Date: 2019-05-10 Impact factor: 3.254
Authors: S J Storey; G FitzGerald; G Moore; E Knights; S Atkinson; S Smith; O Freeman; P Cryer; A P R Wilson Journal: J Hosp Infect Date: 2014-07-24 Impact factor: 3.926
Authors: Nantasit Luangasanatip; Maliwan Hongsuwan; Direk Limmathurotsakul; Yoel Lubell; Andie S Lee; Stephan Harbarth; Nicholas P J Day; Nicholas Graves; Ben S Cooper Journal: BMJ Date: 2015-07-28
Authors: Qian Xu; Yang Liu; Darius Cepulis; Ann Jerde; Rachel A Sheppard; Kaitlin Tretter; Leah Oppy; Gina Stevenson; Sarah Bishop; Sean P Clifford; Peng Liu; Maiying Kong; Jiapeng Huang Journal: Am J Infect Control Date: 2021-05-28 Impact factor: 2.918