Impact of hand hygiene on the infectious risk in nursing home residents: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

In nursing homes, the infectious risk is high, making infection control using approaches such as hand hygiene (HH) a major issue. However, the effectiveness of HH in these settings is not well documented, and HH compliance is low.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Clinical Trials for studies in nursing homes that either described a HH-related intervention or assessed HH compliance and included a measured infectious outcome. Two reviewers independently performed the study selection.

RESULTS

Fifty-six studies met the inclusion criteria and were reviewed. Most were outbreak reports (39%), followed by observational studies (23%), controlled trials (23%), and before-after intervention studies (14%). Thirty-five studies (63%) reported results in favor of HH on at least one of their outcome measures; in addition, the infection control success rate was higher when at least one HH-related intervention (eg, staff education on HH, increased availability of handrub solution) was included (70% vs 30% for no intervention). However, only 25% of randomized trials concluded that HH-related interventions led to a reduction in the infectious risk.

CONCLUSION

The results of this systematic review suggest that more evidence on HH effectiveness in nursing homes is needed. Future interventional studies should enhance methodologic rigor using clearly defined outcome measures, standardized reporting of findings, and a relevant HH observation tool.

The role of education in the prevention and control of infection: a review of the literature

This paper discusses a literature review which was undertaken prior to a research study about student nurses' and midwives' experiences of learning infection control in clinical practice. Its aim is to identify the role of education in the prevention and control of infection, with a specific focus on compliance with infection control precautions and reduction in infection rates. It also identifies the methods used for teaching infection control. The review concludes that there is no rigorous and convincing evidence that education improves compliance with infection control precautions or reduces rates of infection, particularly in the long-term. Areas for future research are identified.

Interventions to improve hand hygiene compliance in patient care

BACKGROUND

Health care-associated infection is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Hand hygiene is regarded as an effective preventive measure.

OBJECTIVES

To update the review done in 2007, to assess the short and longer-term success of strategies to improve hand hygiene compliance and to determine whether a sustained increase in hand hygiene compliance can reduce rates of health care-associated infection.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We conducted electronic searches of: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group specialised register of trials; MEDLINE; PubMed; EMBASE; CINAHL; and the BNI. Originally searched to July 2006, for the update databases were searched from August 2006 until November 2009.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials, controlled clinical trials, controlled before and after studies, and interrupted time series analyses meeting explicit entry and quality criteria used by the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group were eligible for inclusion. Studies reporting indicators of hand hygiene compliance and proxy indicators such as product use were considered. Self-reported data were not considered a valid measure of compliance. Studies to promote hand hygiene compliance as part of a care bundle approach were included, providing data relating specifically to hand hygiene were presented separately. Studies were excluded if hand hygiene was assessed in simulations, non-clinical settings or the operating theatre setting.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed data quality.

MAIN RESULTS

Four studies met the criteria for the review: two from the original review and two from the update. Two studies evaluated simple education initiatives, one using a randomized clinical trial design and the other a controlled before and after design. Both measured hand hygiene compliance by direct observation. The other two studies were both interrupted times series studies. One study presented three separate interventions within the same paper: simple substitutions of product and two multifaceted campaigns, one of which included involving practitioners in making decisions about choice of hand hygiene products and the components of the hand hygiene program. The other study also presented two separate multifaceted campaigns, one of which involved application of social marketing theory. In these two studies follow-up data collection continued beyond twelve months, and a proxy measure of hand hygiene compliance (product use) was recorded. Microbiological data were recorded in one study. Hand hygiene compliance increased for one of the studies where it was measured by direct observation, but the results from the other study were not conclusive. Product use increased in the two studies in which it was reported, with inconsistent results reported for one initiative. MRSA incidence decreased in the one study reporting microbiological data.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The quality of intervention studies intended to increase hand hygiene compliance remains disappointing. Although multifaceted campaigns with social marketing or staff involvement appear to have an effect, there is insufficient evidence to draw a firm conclusion. There remains an urgent need to undertake methodologically robust research to explore the effectiveness of soundly designed and implemented interventions to increase hand hygiene compliance.

Survey of healthcare-associated infection rates in a nursing home resident population

In this study we assessed the incidence and types of healthcare-associated infection (HCAI) in a nursing home resident population. The influences of home size, resident category, gender and age were also examined. Fifteen homes were recruited and infection rates recorded from 1 October 2006 to 2 December 2006. A rate of 6.04 infections/1000 bed days was recorded for the complete study. Infection rates for the four main categories of infection (number of infections/ 1000 bed days) were respiratory (2.52), urinary (1.87), skin and soft tissue (1.57) and gastrointestinal (0.41). Infection rates for small, medium and large homes were 4.64 (range 1.95—6.51), 5.9 (range 0.49—10.76) and 7.79 (range 5.79—9.39), respectively; however, statistical significance was not achieved ( p = 0.335). Results indicate that respiratory infection rates are higher in larger homes (4.08) than in small (1.88) or medium size homes (2.22). Urinary infection rates were similar in small (1.89), medium (1.88) and large (1.82) homes and skin and soft tissue infections were lower in small homes (0.87) but similar in medium (1.69) and large (1.90) homes. We found a statistically significant relationship between the type of infection acquired and both resident category ( p = 0.017) and gender ( p = 0.005); the relationship between type of infection and age did not reach statistical significance ( p = 0.346).