The effect of incorporating covert observation into established overt observation-based hand hygiene promotion programs

Hand hygiene compliance and improvement interventions in the Eastern Mediterranean Region: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Hand hygiene compliance among healthcare workers is crucial for preventing infections in healthcare settings. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the compliance of healthcare workers in the Eastern Mediterranean region with hand hygiene guidelines and synthesize evidence on the success rate of strategies to improve hand hygiene. Five electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Scopus) were searched up to August 2020. Articles were included if they were conducted in the Eastern Mediterranean Region. A manual search was conducted for reference lists of included papers, and relevant additional references were reviewed. Two reviewers independently screened articles for inclusion, performed data extraction, and assessed quality. A meta-analysis was conducted to synthesize findings and determine the prevalence of hand hygiene compliance interventions. The search yielded 6678 articles. After removing duplicates and applying inclusion/exclusion criteria, 42 articles were included, of which 24 were meta-analyzed. The meta-analysis showed a compliance prevalence of 32% with significant heterogeneity (I2= 99.7% p <0.001). Interventions using the World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines were over two times more likely to improve compliance rates (OR= 2.26, [95% CI:(2.09 - 2.44)], I2= 95%, p<0.001) compared to no intervention. Other interventions were close to two times more likely to improve compliance rates (OR= 1.84, [95% CI:(1.66 - 2.04)], I2= 98% p= 0.001). Approximately two-thirds of healthcare providers in the Eastern Mediterranean region were non-compliant with standard hand hygiene practices, highlighting the need for increased efforts, awareness, observation, and control policies.

Hand hygiene knowledge, attitude, barriers and improvement measures among healthcare workers in the Republic of Korea: a cross-sectional survey exploring interprofessional differences

BACKGROUND

Hand hygiene (HH) is a fundamental component of infection prevention and control in healthcare settings. This study aimed to identify knowledge, attitude, and barriers to HH according to occupational groups and strategies to increase the rate of HH compliance among healthcare workers (HCWs).

METHODS

This cross-sectional survey was conducted in July 2018 at four university-affiliated hospitals. The survey comprised seven parts with 49 items, including self-reported HH compliance, knowledge, attitudes, behaviours, barriers to HH, and improvement strategies.

RESULTS

A total of 1046 HCWs participated in the survey. The nursing group's self-reported HH compliance rate was the highest, followed by other HCWs and physicians. The scores regarding knowledge, attitudes, and behaviours regarding HH were the highest in the nursing group. The nursing group also had higher internal and emotional motivation scores. Physicians and nurses found HH the most challenging in emergencies, while other HCWs considered skin problems caused by HH products the most significant barrier. Among 12 improvement measures, approximately 20% of the respondents ranked "diversify types of hand sanitisers," "install soap and paper towels in each hospital room," and "change perception through various HH campaigns" as the top three priorities. The physician group deemed the timely reminder of HH compliance as the second most critical improvement measure.

CONCLUSION

Differences in knowledge, attitude and barriers hindering HH compliance and improvement plans were identified for each group. The findings suggest that targeted interventions tailored to the specific needs of different occupational groups may effectively improve HH compliance in healthcare settings.

The power of feedback: Implementing a comprehensive hand hygiene observer program

BACKGROUND

Hand hygiene (HH) is a fundamental component of infection prevention within all healthcare settings. We implemented a hospital-wide program built on overt HH observation, real-time feedback, and thematic analysis of HH misses.

METHODS

A robust observer training program was established to include foundational training in the WHO's My Five Moments of HH. Observational data from 2011 to 2019 were analyzed by unit, provider type, and thematic analyses of misses.

RESULTS

During the study period, we conducted 160,917 hospital-wide observations on 29 units (monthly average of 1,490 observations). Institutional compliance remained above 95% from 2013 to 2019. Thematic analysis revealed "touching self" and "touching phone" as common, institution-wide reasons for HH misses.

DISCUSSION

Overt observations facilitated communication between HH program and healthcare staff to better understand workflow and educate staff on HH opportunities. This program is an integral part of the Infection Prevention team and has been deployed to collect supplemental data during clusters and outbreaks investigations.

CONCLUSIONS

In addition to having rich HH data, successes of this program, include increased awareness of IPC practices, enhanced communication about patient safety, enriched dialog and feedback around HH misses, and relationship building among program observers, unit staff and leaders.

Hand hygiene compliance by direct observation in physicians and nurses: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Direct observation of hand hygiene compliance is the "gold standard" despite limitations and potential for bias. Previous literature highlights poorer hand hygiene compliance amongst physicians than nurses and suggests that covert monitoring may give better compliance estimates than overt monitoring.

AIM

This review aimed to explore differences in compliance between physicians and nurses further, and to analyse if compliance estimates differed when observations were covert rather than overt.

METHODS

A systematic search of databases PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL and CINAHL was performed. Experimental or observational studies in hospital settings in high-income countries published in English from 2010 onwards were included if estimates for both physicians and nurses using direct observation were reported. The search yielded 4814 studies, of which 105 were included.

FINDINGS

The weighted pooled compliance rate for nurses was 52% (95% CI 47% to 57%) and for doctors was 45% (95% CI 40% to 49%). Heterogeneity was considerable (I²=99%). The majority of studies were at moderate or high risk of bias. Random-effects meta-analysis of low risk of bias studies suggests higher compliance for nurses than physicians for both overt (difference of 7%, 95% CI for the difference 0.8% to 13.5%, p=0.027) and covert (difference of 7%, 95% CI 3% to 11%, p=0.0002) observation. Considerable heterogeneity was found in all analyses.

CONCLUSION

Wide variability in compliance estimates and differences in the methodological quality of hand hygiene studies were identified. Further research with meta-regression should explore sources of heterogeneity and improve the conduct and reporting of hand hygiene studies.

Direct hand hygiene observations and feedback increased hand hygiene compliance among nurses and doctors in medical and surgical wards - an eight-year observational study

BACKGROUND

The improvement of hand hygiene compliance (HHC) is critical to preventing healthcare-associated infections (HCAIs). The present study explored how direct observation and feedback influences HHC among nurses and doctors in surgical and medical wards, and whether these actions impact HCAI incidence.

METHODS

In this longitudinal observational study, HHC and the incidence of HCAIs were observed in six medical and seven surgical wards in a tertiary hospital in Finland from May 2013 to Dec 2020. Data of the observations of five hand hygiene (HH) moments were collected from the hospital HH and the HCAI monitoring registries. For statistical analyses a multivariable logistic regression analysis and a Poisson regression model were used.

FINDINGS

HH monitoring included 24 614 observations among nurses and 6 396 observations among doctors. In medical wards, HHC rates increased 10.8% - from 86.2% to 95.5%, and HCAI incidence decreased from 15.9 to 13.5 per 1000 patient days (p<0.0001). In surgical wards, HHC increased 32.7% - from 67.6% to 89.7%, and HCAI incidence decreased from 13.7 to 12.0 per 1000 patient days (p< 0.0001). The overall HHC increased significantly among nurses (17.8%) and doctors (65.8%). The HHC was better among nurses than doctors (in medical wards; OR 3.36; 95% CI 2.90-3.90, p<0.001 and in surgical wards; OR 9.85; 95% CI 8.97-10.8, p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Direct observations and feedback of HH increased significantly HHC among nurses and doctors over an eight-year period. During the same period, the incidence of HCAIs significantly decreased in both medical and surgical wards.

Out of sight, out of mind: a prospective observational study to estimate the duration of the Hawthorne effect on hand hygiene events

Background

Human auditing has been the gold standard for evaluating hand hygiene (HH) compliance but is subject to the Hawthorne effect (HE), the change in subjects’ behaviour due to their awareness of being observed. For the first time, we used electronic HH monitoring to characterise the duration of the HE on HH events after human auditors have left the ward.

Methods

Observations were prospectively conducted on two transplant wards at a tertiary centre between May 2018 and January 2019. HH events were measured using the electronic GOJO Smartlink Activity Monitoring System located throughout the ward. Non-covert human auditing was conducted in 1-hour intervals at random locations on both wards on varying days of the week. Two adjusted negative binomial regression models were fit in order to estimate an overall auditor effect and a graded auditor effect.

Results

In total, 365 674 HH dispensing events were observed out of a possible 911 791 opportunities. In the adjusted model, the presence of an auditor increased electronic HH events by approximately 2.5-fold in the room closest to where the auditor was standing (9.86 events per hour/3.98 events per hour; p<0.01), an effect sustained across only the partial hour before and after the auditor was present but not beyond the first hour after the auditor left. This effect persisted but was attenuated in areas distal from the auditor (total ward events of 6.91*6.32–7.55, p<0.01). Additionally, there was significant variability in the magnitude of the HE based on temporal and geographic distribution of audits.

Conclusion

The HE on HH events appears to last for a limited time on inpatient wards and is highly dynamic across time and auditor location. These findings further challenge the validity and value of human auditing and support the need for alternative and complementary monitoring methods.