Survey of acute hospital infection control resources and services in the Republic of Ireland

The World Health Organization '5 moments of hand hygiene': the scientific foundation

The World Health Organization (WHO) launched the first Global Patient Safety Challenge in 2005 and introduced the '5 moments of hand hygiene' in 2009 in an attempt to reduce the burden of health care associated infections. Many NHS trusts in England adopted this model of hand hygiene, which prompts health care workers to clean their hands at five distinct stages of caring for the patient. Our review analyses the scientific foundation for the five moments of hand hygiene and explores the evidence, as referenced by WHO, to support these recommendations. We found no strong scientific support for this regime of hand hygiene as a means of reducing health care associated infections. Consensus-based guidelines based on weak scientific foundations should be assessed carefully to prevent shifting the clinical focus from more important issues and to direct limited resources more effectively. We recommend caution in the universal adoption of the WHO '5 moments of hand hygiene' by orthopaedic surgeons and other health care workers and emphasise the need for evidence-based principles when adopting hospital guidelines aimed at promoting excellence in clinical practice.

Effectiveness of an audible reminder on hand hygiene adherence

BACKGROUND

Multimodal interventions aim to improve health care workers' adherence to hand hygiene guidelines. Visitors are not primarily targeted, but may spread epidemic infections. Effective interventions that improve the adherence of visitors to hand hygiene guidelines are needed to prevent the transmission of epidemic infections to or from health care environments.

METHODS

An electronic motion sensor-triggered audible hand hygiene reminder was installed at hospital ward entrances. An 8-month preinterventional and postinterventional study was carried out to measure the adherence of hospital visitors and staff to hand hygiene guidelines.

RESULTS

Overall hand hygiene adherence increased from 7.6% to 49.9% (P < .001). The adherence of visitors and nonclinical staff increased immediately from 10.6% to 63.7% and from 5.3% to 34.8%, respectively (P < .001). Adherence of doctors, nurses, and physiotherapists increased gradually from 4.5% to 38.3%, from 5.4% to 43.4%, and from 8.7% to 49.5%, respectively (P < .001). Improved adherence was sustained among visitors and clinical staff (P < .001), but not among nonclinical staff (P = .341).

CONCLUSIONS

The electronic motion sensor-triggered audible reminder immediately and significantly improved and sustained greater adherence of hospital visitors and clinical staff to hand hygiene guidelines. This is an effective addition to multimodal hand hygiene interventions and may help control epidemic infections.

Can 'search and destroy' reduce nosocomial methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in an Irish hospital?

In Ireland, the Department of Health and Children recommends admission screening of patients at increased risk of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), isolation of these patients until proven negative, and eradication of any MRSA identified. These actions form the basis of a programme called 'search and destroy' that has successfully reduced MRSA in Scandinavia. There is, however, very little information published on the use of search and destroy in Ireland. This study was carried out using a quantitative, quasi-experimental design in the form of an interventional cohort study. The effect of reducing the turnaround time for MRSA results (2007) and the introduction of pre-emptive isolation (2008) was examined in a hospital with an established admission screening programme for MRSA. Rates of MRSA infection and colonisation were monitored post-intervention and compared to baseline rates prior to the intervention (2005-2006). Rates of hospital-acquired (nosocomial) MRSA infections and colonisation fell in both 2007 and 2008. However, due to the quasi-experimental design of the study and the low endemic level of MRSA in the hospital, a causal link could not be established.

The pandemic influenza planning process in Ontario acute care hospitals

BACKGROUND

There will be little time to prepare when an influenza pandemic strikes; hospitals need to develop and test pandemic influenza plans beforehand.

METHODS

Acute care hospitals in Ontario were surveyed regarding their pandemic influenza preparedness plans.

RESULTS

The response rate was 78.5%, and 95 of 121 hospitals participated. Three quarters (76.8%, 73 of 95) of hospitals had pandemic influenza plans. Only 16.4% (12 of 73) of hospitals with plans had tested them. Larger (chi(2) = 6.7, P = .01) and urban hospitals (chi(2) = 5.0, P = .03) were more likely to have tested their plans. 70.4% (50 of 71) Of respondents thought the pandemic influenza planning process was not adequately funded. No respondents were "very satisfied" with the completeness of their hospital's pandemic plan, and only 18.3% were "satisfied."

CONCLUSION

Important challenges were identified in pandemic planning: one quarter of hospitals did not have a plan, few plans were tested, key players were not involved, plans were frequently incomplete, funding was inadequate, and small and rural hospitals were especially disadvantaged. If these problems are not addressed, the result may be increased morbidity and mortality when a virulent influenza pandemic hits.

Challenges of implementing national guidelines for the control and prevention of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus colonization or infection in acute care hospitals in the Republic of Ireland

Of the 49 acute care hospitals in Ireland that responded to the survey questionnaire drafted by the Infection Control Subcommittee of the Health Protection Surveillance Centre's Strategy for the Control of Antimicrobial Resistance in Ireland, 43 reported barriers to the full implementation of national guidelines for the control and prevention of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection; these barriers included poor infrastructure (42 hospitals), inadequate laboratory resources (40 hospitals), inadequate staffing (39 hospitals), and inadequate numbers of isolation rooms and beds (40 hospitals). Four of the hospitals did not have an educational program on hand hygiene, and only 17 had an antibiotic stewardship program.

Staff perception and institutional reporting: two views of infection control compliance in British Columbia and Ontario three years after an outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome

Few studies have audited the resources available to infection control (IC) and occupational health (OH) to promote safe work behaviour, whilst comparing audited findings with perceptions by healthcare workers (HCWs). We aimed to determine the IC and OH resources available and compare this with HCWs' perception of resources, following an outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). A survey of IC and OH resources and a questionnaire completed by HCWs were compared with on-site observational audits. HCWs believed that plans were available to protect against future SARS-like events but audits revealed that these did not exist in many facilities. Both OH and IC were under-resourced post-SARS, with OH professionals particularly lacking in British Columbia. There is a discrepancy between HCWs' perception of what is available and what is actually accessible in facilities. Experts in IC and OH need to focus on communication.