Identification of low, high, and super gelers and barriers to hand hygiene among intensive care unit nurses

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this article was to provide information identified during hand hygiene (HH) surveillance periods at 5 intensive care units (ICUs) (4 hospitals) in Texas.

METHODS

Using room entry and room exit, overt observation periods were 8 consecutive hours for 3-5 days on 64 ICU nurses.

RESULTS

A total of 3,620 HH opportunities were recorded during 18 days of observation (144 hours). The average hand hygiene compliance (HHC) rate was 64%, with 19% of the nurses participating in HH in the 60%-69% range. Male nurses had a rate of 67%, whereas female nurses had a rate of 62%. Having a HHC rate of <29%, 6% of the nurses were identified as low gelers, whereas 14% were identified as high gelers (HHC rate 80%-89%), and 13% were classified as super gelers (HHC rate 90%-100%). Four barriers to HHC were identified: carrying something in their hands, talking on mobile phones, donning gloves or personal protective equipment, and pushing or pulling the workstation on wheels; all were statistically significant. Accounting for 18% noncompliance, barriers identified present teaching opportunities to increase compliance.

CONCLUSIONS

Average HHC rates recorded during 10- to 20-minute periods with random sampling may not show the complete picture of HHC. Barriers to HHC were identified that can be used as teaching interventions.

Infection prevention practice: how does experience affect knowledge and application?

The purpose of this study was to evaluate nurses’ knowledge of infection prevention procedures, the degree to which they were applied correctly, and whether length of service affected either knowledge or application. Nurses with over five years of experience had significantly increased understanding of infection prevention ( p=0.009) and significantly increased application of knowledge to practice ( p=0.001), compared to nurses with five years or less experience. In particular, understanding of hand hygiene and use of personal protective equipment (PPE) was poor although application was compliant, while knowledge of care of patients with meticillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and Clostridium difficile was poor, which was reflected by substandard application of knowledge to practice. The results of this study suggest that focusing infection prevention education around patients with specific infections, such as MRSA and C. difficile, rather than on individual standard precautions may more effectively increase knowledge and therefore application of infection prevention practices.

Saving Lives audits: do they improve infection prevention and control practice?

Aretrospective audit evaluation was conducted to determine whether the introduction of two clinical skills trainers for four months in a district general hospital improved compliance with infection prevention and control practices. Saving Lives (Department of Health, 2010) peripheral venous cannula and urinary catheter high impact intervention audit data were analysed for six months before, four months during and six months after the clinical skills training was implemented for six control wards and seven intervention wards. Findings showed that although the control wards did not improve compliance significantly over the study period, the intervention wards improved compliance with the high impact intervention care bundles studied and that this practice was sustained for six months after the clinical skills training. The findings suggest that education is required to improve clinical skills surrounding cannulation and catheterisation, which can then be sustained by Saving Lives audits to reduce the risk of infection to patients.