Infection Prevention for the Emergency Department: Out of Reach or Standard of Care?

A time-motion study on impact of spatial separation for empiric airborne precautions in emergency department length of stay

AIMS

To evaluate the impact of spatial separation on patient flow in the emergency department.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective, time-and-motion analysis conducted from 15 to 22 August, 2022 at the emergency department of a tertiary hospital in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. During this duration, spatial separation was implemented in critical and semi-critical zones to separate patients with symptoms of respiratory infections into respiratory area, and patients without into non-respiratory area. This study adhered to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines.

METHODS

Patients triaged to critical and semi-critical zones were included in this study. Timestamps of patient processes in emergency department until patient departure were documented.

RESULTS

The emergency department length-of-stay was longer in respiratory area compared to non-respiratory area; 527 min (381-698) versus 390 min (285-595) in critical zone and 477 min (312-739) versus 393 min (264-595) in semi-critical zone. In critical zone, time intervals of critical flow processes and compliance to hospital benchmarks were similar in both areas. More patients in respiratory area were managed within the arrival-to-contact ≤30 min benchmark and more patients in non-respiratory area had emergency department length-of-stay ≤8 h.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of spatial separation in infection control should address decision-to-departure delays to minimise emergency department length of stay.

IMPACT

The study evaluated the impact of spatial separation on patient flow in the emergency department. Emergency department length-of-stay was significantly prolonged in the respiratory area. Hospital administrators and policymakers can optimise infection control protocols measures in emergency departments, balancing infection control measures with efficient patient care delivery.

REPORTING METHOD

STROBE guidelines.

NO PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

None.

TRIAL AND PROTOCOL REGISTRATION

The study obtained ethics approval from the institution's Medical Ethics Committee (MREC ID NO: 20221113-11727).

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The author has checked and make sure our submission has conformed to the Journal's statistical guideline. There is a statistician on the author team (Noor Azhar).

Hand hygiene in emergencies: Multiprofessional perceptions from a mixed methods based online survey in Germany

Introduction

Despite high vulnerability to infection, hand disinfection compliance in emergencies is low. This is regularly justified as the disinfection procedure delays life support, and instead, wearing disposable gloves is preferred. Simulation studies showed higher achievable compliance than detected in real-life situations. This study aimed to explore healthcare providers' attitudes toward hand disinfection and using gloves in emergencies.

Methods

We conducted an anonymous online survey in Germany on the attitude and subjective behavior in the five moments of hand hygiene in a closed environment and an open convenience sampling survey. Statistics included paired student's t-tests corrected for multiple testing. For qualitative analysis, we employed a single-coder approach.

Results

In 400 participants, we detected low priority of WHO-1 (before touching a patient) and WHO-2 (before clean/aseptic procedure) hand hygiene moments, despite knowing the risks of omission of hand disinfection. For all moments, self-assessment exceeded the assessment of colleagues (p < 0.001). For WHO-3, we detected a lower disinfection priority for wearing gloves compared to contaminated bare hands. Qualitative analyses revealed five themes: basic conditions, didactic implementations, cognitive load, and uncertainty about feasibility and efficacy.

Discussion

Considering bias, the study's subjective nature, the unknown role of emergency-related infections contributing to hospital-acquired infections, and different experiences of healthcare providers, we conclude that hand disinfection before emergencies is de-prioritized and justified by the emergency situation regardless of the objective feasibility.

Conclusion

This study reveals subjective and objective barriers to implementation of WHO-1 and WHO-2 moments of hand disinfection to be further evaluated and addressed in educational programs.

Hospital health care workers' use of facial protective equipment before the COVID-19 pandemic, implications for future policy

BACKGROUND

Prepandemic routine use of facial (respiratory and eye) protective equipment (FPE) by health care workers was suboptimal. Understanding factors affecting routine use would facilitate escalation to high level use during infectious disease emergencies. This study explored health care workers FPE-related knowledge, attitudes and behaviors.

METHODS

Mixed methods were used in a respiratory ward and adult and pediatric emergency departments (EDs), prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. Study design and thematic analysis were based on the theoretical domains framework. Emergent themes were categorized, using the COM-B behavior model, into capability(C), opportunity(O) and motivation(M), which influence behavior(B).

RESULTS

22 emergent themes, representing factors influencing FPE use, were mapped to theoretical domains framework domains. Personal experience and departmental cultures influenced motivation. Compared with respiratory ward staff, ED clinicians were less knowledgeable about FPE; the unique ED environment and culture inhibited opportunities and motivation for FPE use. Eye protection was infrequently used.

DISCUSSION

Optimal FPE use is challenged by ED care models and settings. Changes are needed to translate pandemic-related improvements into routine care of other respiratory infections.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified key determinants of FPE behavior. A review of context-specific FPE guidance for ED by infection prevention and control professionals would help to promote practicable, sustainable compliance.

Educational interventions to improve compliance with disinfection practices of noncritical portable medical equipment: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To describe educational interventions that have been implemented in healthcare settings to increase the compliance of healthcare personnel (HCP) with cleaning and disinfection of noncritical portable medical equipment (PME) requiring low-level disinfection (LLD).

DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

Studies evaluating interventions for improving LLD practices in settings with HCP, including healthcare students and trainees, were eligible for inclusion.

RESULTS

In total, 1,493 abstracts were identified and 1,416 were excluded, resulting in 77 studies that underwent full text review. Among these, 68 were further excluded due to study design, setting, or intervention. Finally, 9 full-text studies were extracted; 1 study was excluded during the critical appraisal process, leaving 8 studies. Various forms of interventions were implemented in the studies, including luminescence, surveillance of contamination with feedback, visual signage, enhanced training, and improved accessibility of LLD supplies. Of the 8 included studies, 4 studies reported successes in improving LLD practices among HCP.

CONCLUSIONS

The available literature was limited, indicating the need for additional research on pedagogical methods to improve LLD practices. Use of visual indicators of contamination and multifaceted interventions improved LLD practice by HCP.

Understanding routine (non-outbreak) respiratory protective equipment behaviour of hospital workers in different clinical settings - lessons for the future post COVID-19

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic has drawn attention to the importance of facial (respiratory and eye) protective equipment (FPE). Optimal use of FPE in non-outbreak situations, will enable frontline staff, such as emergency department (ED) clinicians, to adapt more rapidly and safely to the increased demands and skills required during an infectious disease outbreak.

METHODS

A survey, designed to determine the attitudes, beliefs and knowledge of HCWs around the use of FPE for protection against respiratory infections, was distributed to staff in a respiratory ward, an adult ED and a paediatric ED in Sydney, Australia prior to COVID-19.

RESULTS

The survey revealed differences between the respiratory ward and the EDs and between professional groups. ED staff, particularly paediatric clinicians, were less likely than ward staff to use FPE appropriately during routine care. Medical staff were more likely to work outside of IPC policies.

DISCUSSION

The busy, relatively chaotic ED environment presents unique challenges for optimal compliance with safe FPE use when caring for patients with respiratory symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Building upon the lessons of the pandemic, it is timely to address the specific infection prevention and control needs of the ED environment to improve FPE compliance during non-outbreak situations.

Higher nursing care level is associated with higher incidence of blood culture contamination in the emergency department: A case-control study

Background

Blood culture is critical in treating infectious diseases. This leads to unnecessary intervention, inappropriate antibiotic use, and excess cost. Few studies have tackled patient factors that could possibly affect contamination rates. This study aimed to explore the association between patients' nursing care levels and blood culture contamination.

Methods

This is a single-centered, retrospective, case-control study of adult patients whose blood culture specimens were taken in the emergency department between April 2018 and July 2019. The study was conducted in an acute care community hospital in Japan. The case group included patients with false-positive blood culture results with contamination; the control group included patients with true-positive or true-negative blood culture results without contamination. We randomly selected two control patients per case. Patients' age, gender, nursing care level, ambulance use, housing status, Glasgow Coma Scale, hospital arrival time, and puncture sites were obtained from the patients' medical charts.

Results

Of the 5130 patients, 686 patients got positive blood culture results. Of the 686 patients, 35 patients were included in the case group, and 70 were randomly selected from the noncontaminated group and included in the control. In multivariate analysis, patients with contaminated blood cultures had a higher nursing care level (adjusted odds ratio: 8.50; 95% confidence interval: 1.65-43.7; p = 0.01).

Conclusions

A higher nursing care level is associated with a higher incidence of blood culture contamination in the emergency department. Careful and appropriate procedures are required for patients with a higher nursing care level.

Antimicrobial resistance control in the emergency department: a need for concrete improvement

BACKGROUND

Rational use of antibiotics (AB) and infection prevention and control (IPC) are key measures for reducing antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in healthcare. Nonetheless, transferring evidence into clinical practice in emergency medicine has proven difficult. The extent to which structural requirements for implementing AMR control exist in German emergency departments (ED) was determined in a survey.

METHODS

Aspects of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) and IPC implementation were surveyed within the German Association for Emergency Medicine (Deutsche Gesellschaft interdisziplinäre Notfall- und Akutmedizin e.V, DGINA) in 2018. Data were collected using an anonymous online questionnaire on ED characteristics, ED-based-link personnel for IPC and AMS, education and training, process monitoring and specific requirements for AMS and IPC as availability of AMR data and alcohol-based hand rub (AHR) consumption data. Data were analysed descriptively.

RESULTS

66 EDs with in median [interquartile range (IQR)] of 30,900 [23,000; 40,000] patient visits participated in the survey. EDs' healthcare worker (HCW) received regular training on hand hygiene (HH) in 67% and on AMS in 20% of EDs. Surveillance of AHR consumption was performed by 73% EDs, surveillance of AB consumption by 64%. Regular audits on HH were performed in 39%. Training and audit activities, showed no significant variations according to EDs' organizational characteristics. HCWs received immediate feedback of HH performance in 29%, in 23% a regular structured feedback of HH was provided. ED-based physicians with (1) specific IPC responsibilities and training were available in 61%, with (2) AMS training and responsibility in 15%. 83% had ED based IPC link nurses with precise ICP responsibilities in place. Essentially resistance data existed at the hospital level (74%) rather than at ED- or regional level (15% and 14% respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Management of AMR varies in German EDs, especially in accordance to hospital size and level of emergency care. IPC seems to receive more attention than AMS. Our data indicate the need for more implementation of regular IPC and AMS training in connection with monitoring and feedback in German EDs.

Hand hygiene practices for prevention of health care-associated infections associated with admitted infectious patients in the emergency department: a systematic review

Background

In most high-income countries, emergency departments (ED) represent the principal point of access forcer by critically ill or injured patients. Unlike inpatient units, ED healthcare workers (ED HCWs) have demonstrated relative lack of adherence to hand hygiene (HH) guidelines, commonly citing frequency of intervention and high rates of admission, which reflect severity of cases encountered.

Aim

Assessment of studies on hand hygiene compliance (HHC) by ED HCWs conducted between 2010 and 2020, seeking to estimate HHC rates and intervention strategies utilised to improve HHC in EDs.

Methods

Searches conducted in Web of Science, EBSCO HOST (CINHAL & Medline), PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane for full studies published between 2010 and 2020 on the topic of HHC in the ED.

Results

One hundred twenty-nine eligible articles were identified of which 79 were excluded. Fifty-one underwent full-text screening before 20 studies were deemed relevant. Of the eligible studies, fifteen (75%) had, as the primary outcome, HHC according to the WHO-recommended 5-moments. Twelve studies (60%) implemented multimodal or single intervention strategies. Eight studies were ambiguous regarding the nature of the approach adopted. In the nine observational studies where HHC was documented, an overall post-intervention median HHC rate of 45% (range 8–89.7%).

Conclusion

Multimodal approaches appear to have enhanced HHC moderately among ED HCWs. Elevated complexity associated with critically ill patients, and ED overcrowding, are contributing factors to relatively low compliance rates observed. Strategies to improve HHC rates may need to acknowledge, and cater for, the context of an unpredictable environment.

Efficacy of cardiopulmonary resuscitation performance while wearing a powered air-purifying respirator

BACKGROUND

The use of personal protective equipment for respiratory infection control during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is a physical burden to healthcare providers. The duration for which CPR quality according to recommended guidelines can be maintained under these circumstances is important. We investigated whether a 2-min shift was appropriate for chest compression and determined the duration for which chest compression was maintained in accordance with the recommended guidelines while wearing personal protective equipment.

METHODS

This prospective crossover simulation study was performed at a single center from September 2020 to October 2020. Five indicators of CPR quality were measured during the first and second sessions of the study period. All participants wore a Level D powered air-purifying respirator (PAPR), and the experiment was conducted using a Resusci Anne manikin, which can measure the quality of chest compressions. Each participant conducted two sessions. In Session 1, the sequence of 2 min of chest compressions, followed by a 2-min rest, was repeated twice; in Session 2, the sequence of 1-min chest compressions followed by a 1-min rest was repeated four times.

RESULTS

All 34 participants completed the study. The sufficiently deep compression rate was 65.9 ± 31.1% in the 1-min shift group and 61.5 ± 30.5% in the 2-min shift group. The mean compression depth was 52.8 ± 4.3 mm in the 1-min shift group and 51.0 ± 6.1 mm in the 2-min shift group. These two parameters were significantly different between the two groups. There was no significant difference in the other values related to CPR quality.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicated that 1 min of chest compressions with a 1-min rest maintained a better quality of CPR while wearing a PAPR.

Transmission of Infections during Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation

Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is an emergency lifesaving endeavor, performed in either the hospital or outpatient settings, that significantly improves outcomes and survival rates when performed in a timely fashion. As with any other medical procedure, CPR can bear potential risks not only for the patient but also for the rescuer. Among those risks, transmission of an infectious agent has been one of the most compelling triggers of reluctance to perform CPR among providers. The concern for transmission of an infection from the resuscitated subject may impede prompt initiation and implementation of CPR, compromising survival rates and neurological outcomes of the patients. Infections during CPR can be potentially acquired through airborne, droplet, contact, or hematogenous transmission. However, only a few cases of infection transmission have been actually reported globally. In this review, we present the available epidemiological findings on transmission of different pathogens during CPR and data on reluctance of health care workers to perform CPR. We also outline the levels of personal protective equipment and other protective measures according to potential infectious hazards that providers are potentially exposed to during CPR and summarize current guidelines on protection of CPR providers from international societies and stakeholders.

Observation of Hand Hygiene Practices in Home Health Care

OBJECTIVE

To describe nurse hand hygiene practices in the home health care (HHC) setting, nurse adherence to hand hygiene guidelines, and factors associated with hand hygiene opportunities during home care visits.

DESIGN

Observational study of nurse hand hygiene practices.

SETTING

and Participants: Licensed practical/vocational and registered nurses were observed in the homes of patients being served by a large nonprofit HHC agency.

METHODS

Two researchers observed 400 home care visits conducted by 50 nurses. The World Health Organization's "5 Moments for Hand Hygiene" validated observation tool was used to record opportunities and actual practices of hand hygiene, with 3 additional opportunities specific to the HHC setting. Patient assessment data available in the agency electronic health record and a nurse demographic questionnaire were also collected to describe patients and nurse participants.

RESULTS

A total of 2014 opportunities were observed. On arrival in the home was the most frequent opportunity (n = 384), the least frequent was after touching a patient's surroundings (n = 43). The average hand hygiene adherence rate was 45.6% after adjusting for clustering at the nurse level. Adherence was highest after contact with body fluid (65.1%) and lowest after touching a patient (29.5%). The number of hand hygiene opportunities was higher when patients being served were at increased risk of an infection-related emergency department visit or hospitalization and when the home environment was observed to be "dirty." No nurse or patient demographic characteristics were associated with the rate of nurse hand hygiene adherence.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Hand hygiene adherence in HHC is suboptimal, with rates mirroring those reported in hospital and outpatient settings. The connection between poor hand hygiene and infection transmission has been well studied, and it has received widespread attention with the outbreak of SARS-CoV-2. Agencies can use results found in this study to better inform quality improvement initiatives.

Are loose-fitting powered air-purifying respirators safe during chest compression? A simulation study

BACKGROUND

The application of appropriate personal protective equipment for respiratory protection to health care workers is a cornerstone for providing safe healthcare in emergency departments. We investigated the protective effect and usefulness of loose-fitting powered air-purifying respirators (PAPRs) during chest compression.

METHODS

This was a single-center simulation study performed from May 2019 to July 2019 in a tertiary hospital. We measured the concentrations of ambient aerosol and particles inside the loose-fitting PAPR during chest compression, and this ratio was set as the simulated workplace protecting factor (SWPF). According to the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health regulations, the assigned protection factor (APF) of loose-fitting PAPRs is 25. Thus, the loose-fitting PAPRs were assumed to have a protective effect when the SWPF were ≥ 250 (APF × 10). We measured the SWPF of PAPR in real time during chest compression and also investigated the problems encountered during its use.

RESULTS

Ninety-one participants (median age 29 [interquartile range (IQR): 26-32] years; 74% female) completed the simulation. None of the participants failed with SWPF below 250 during three sessions of chest compression. The median (IQR) values of SWPF at three cycles were 17,063 (10,145-26,373), 15,683 (9477-32,394), and 16,960 (7695-27,279). There was no disconnection of equipment or mechanical failures during chest compression. In addition, most participants (83%) replied that they rarely or never experienced difficulty in verbal communication and felt that the loose-fitting PAPR was comfortable.

CONCLUSIONS

The loose-fitting PAPRs provided sufficient respiratory protection without disturbances during chest compression.

Comparing inpatient versus emergency department clinician perceptions of personal protective equipment for different isolation precautions

Adherence to isolation precaution practices, including use of personal protective equipment (PPE), remains a challenge in most hospitals. We surveyed inpatient and emergency department clinicians about their experiences and opinions of various isolation policies, specifically those related to wearing PPE. Our findings show several differences between inpatient and emergency department clinicians involving perceptions related to safety, and the difficulty associated with using PPE for certain types of organisms.

Enablers of, and barriers to, optimal glove and mask use for routine care in the emergency department: an ethnographic study of Australian clinicians

Background

The risk of healthcare-acquired infection increases during outbreaks of novel infectious diseases. Emergency department (ED) clinicians are at high risk of exposure to both these and common communicable diseases. Personal protective equipment (PPE) is recommended to protect clinicians from acquiring, or becoming vectors of, infection, yet compliance is typically sub-optimal. Little is known about factors that influence use of PPE—specifically gloves and masks—during routine care in the ED.

Methods

This was an ethnographic study, incorporating documentation review, field observations and interviews. The theoretical domains framework (TDF) was used to aid thematic analysis and identify relevant enablers of and barriers to optimal PPE use.

Results

Thirty-one behavioural themes were identified that influenced participants’ use of masks and gloves. There were significant differences, namely: more reported enablers of glove use vs more barriers to mask use. Reasons included more positive unit culture towards glove use, and lower perception of risk via facial contamination.

Conclusion

Emerging infectious diseases, spread (among other routes) by respiratory droplets, have caused global outbreaks. Emergency clinicians should ensure that, as with gloves, the use of masks is incorporated into routine cares where appropriate. Further research which examines items of PPE independently is warranted.

Interventions to improve hand hygiene compliance in emergency departments: a systematic review

The emergency department (ED) is where hand hygiene problems are significant as the procedures in the ED are often high risk and invasive. To date, there have been no comprehensive reviews on hand hygiene in EDs. The aim of this study was to investigate hand hygiene compliance (HHC) rate, factors affecting the HHC rate, and intervention strategies to improve HHC in EDs. Electronic databases were used to search for research published from 1948 to January 2018. The databases included ovidMEDLINE, ovidEMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Koreamed, and Kmbase. All study designs were included. Two reviewers independently extracted the data and assessed the bias risk using reliable and validated tools. A narrative synthesis was performed. Twenty-four studies, including 12 cross-sectional surveys and 12 interventional studies, were included. Of the 12 interventional studies reviewed, only 33% (N = 4) reported HHC rates of more than 50%. Factors that influenced HHC included types of healthcare worker, hand hygiene indication, ED crowding, positive attitudes towards HHC, patient location, auditing hand hygiene, and type of shift. Almost all of the studies (83.3%) applied multimodal or dual interventions to improve HHC. A range of strategies, including education, monitoring and providing feedback, campaigns, and cues, effectively improved HHC. The review findings indicate that there is a room for improvement in HHC in EDs. Future randomized controlled trials are necessary to determine which intervention modalities are most effective and sustainable for HHC improvement.