Effectiveness of alcohol-based hand disinfectants in a public administration: impact on health and work performance related to acute respiratory symptoms and diarrhoea

Hand Hygiene Messaging Design in the Workplace: Views From the Workforce-Introduction

AIMS

The study aimed to (1) discover workers' attitudes toward the use of novel video screens to improve hand sanitization in the workplace and (2) discover what workers' preferences are for hand hygiene (HH) messaging style and tone and reasons for their preferences.

BACKGROUND

Practicing good HH in non-medical office settings is vital to curb the spread of a range of common and infectious diseases. Despite this, workers are rarely consulting in the construction of HH messages. The qualitative views of users can provide us with the "why" rather than the "what" and can highlight areas of cynicism, concern and overall attitudes to HH.

METHODS

A survey was completed by 520 UK workers concerning attitudes and views toward HH messaging and the use of a video-based hand sanitizer unit. Analysis consisted of both qualitative and quantitative methods.

RESULTS

Workers were skeptical toward the use of digital technologies within HH interventions, and there were misgivings about the role that video could play. Results demonstrated a strong preference for positive and supportive messages. Educational and trustworthy qualities were well rated. Messages that emphasized surveillance, previously successful in a clinical setting, or guilt, were not well received. Visual approaches that utilized serious illustration were valued.

CONCLUSION

This study highlights how consulting workers before the design of HH initiatives is important in guiding the design process. The resultant user-centered criteria promotes the use of positive, motivational, thought-provoking, surprising, and visual approaches to HH messaging.

Nonpharmaceutical interventions to prevent viral respiratory infection in community settings: an umbrella review

Background

Respiratory viruses pose an important public health threat to most communities. Nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) such as masks, hand hygiene or physical distancing, among others, are believed to play an important role in reducing transmission of respiratory viruses. In this umbrella review, we summarise the evidence of the effectiveness of NPIs for the prevention of respiratory virus transmission in the community setting.

Observations

A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Medline and Cochrane reviews resulted in a total of 24 studies consisting of 11 systematic reviews and meta-analyses, 12 systematic reviews without meta-analyses and one standalone meta-analysis. The current evidence from these data suggests that hand hygiene is protective against respiratory viral infection. The use of hand hygiene and facemasks, facemasks alone and physical distancing were interventions with inconsistent evidence. Interventions such as school closures, oral hygiene or nasal saline rinses were shown to be effective in reducing the risk of influenza; however, the evidence is sparse and mostly of low and critically low quality.

Conclusions

Studies on the effectiveness of NPIs for the prevention of respiratory viral transmission in the community vary in study design, quality and reported effectiveness. Evidence for the use of hand hygiene or facemasks is the strongest; therefore, the most reasonable suggestion is to use hand hygiene and facemasks in the community setting.

Hand sanitizers as a preventive measure in COVID-19 pandemic, its characteristics, and harmful effects: a review

Background

In the global health emergency caused by COVID-19, multiple experts have mandated the use of hand sanitizers as a safety measure from COVID-19. The sale of hand sanitizers has increased many folds. Therefore, when there is such large use of hand sanitizers, it becomes extremely important to study and understand hand sanitizers in a comprehensive manner.

Main body of the abstract

This article starts with the importance of sanitizers as a defence mechanism that is employed by the hand to fight against the coronavirus. This article provides information about history, types, composition, various dosage forms, and marketed formulations of hand sanitizers. The article sheds a detailed light on industrial production techniques for hand sanitizers and also outlines new innovative techniques that were employed by the industry to mass produce hand sanitizers in the wake of the pandemic. The article further dives into a comparison between hand sanitizers and soaps so as to give pros and cons of the use of soap against the use of hand sanitizers. One of the aims of the article is to study the side effects of sanitizers so as to develop a cautious approach while using hand sanitizers and therefore a comprehensive list of side effects of the use of hand sanitizers is given.

Conclusion

The review article finds that hand sanitizers are extremely efficient in fight the virus but along with it, it brings along arrange of risks which are outlined in the article.

Soap versus sanitiser for preventing the transmission of acute respiratory infections in the community: a systematic review with meta-analysis and dose-response analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of hand hygiene using alcohol-based hand sanitiser to soap and water for preventing the transmission of acute respiratory infections (ARIs) and to assess the relationship between the dose of hand hygiene and the number of ARI, influenza-like illness (ILI) or influenza events.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, Embase, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and trial registries were searched in April 2020.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials that compared a community-based hand hygiene intervention (soap and water, or sanitiser) with a control, or trials that compared sanitiser with soap and water, and measured outcomes of ARI, ILI or laboratory-confirmed influenza or related consequences.

DATA EXTRACTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts for inclusion and extracted data.

RESULTS

Eighteen trials were included. When meta-analysed, three trials of soap and water versus control found a non-significant increase in ARI events (risk ratio (RR) 1.23, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.93); six trials of sanitiser versus control found a significant reduction in ARI events (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.89). When hand hygiene dose was plotted against ARI relative risk, no clear dose-response relationship was observable. Four trials were head-to-head comparisons of sanitiser and soap and water but too heterogeneous to pool: two found a significantly greater reduction in the sanitiser group compared with the soap group and two found no significant difference between the intervention arms.

CONCLUSIONS

Adequately performed hand hygiene, with either soap or sanitiser, reduces the risk of ARI virus transmission; however, direct and indirect evidence suggest sanitiser might be more effective in practice.

Interventions to increase personal protective behaviours to limit the spread of respiratory viruses: A rapid evidence review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Increasing personal protective behaviours is critical for stopping the spread of respiratory viruses, including SARS-CoV-2: We need evidence to inform how to achieve this. We aimed to synthesize evidence on interventions to increase six personal protective behaviours (e.g., hand hygiene, face mask use, maintaining physical distancing) to limit the spread of respiratory viruses.

METHODS

We used best practice for rapid evidence reviews. We searched Ovid MEDLINE and Scopus. Studies conducted in adults or children with active or passive comparators were included. We extracted data on study design, intervention content, mode of delivery, population, setting, mechanism(s) of action, acceptability, practicability, effectiveness, affordability, spill-over effects, and equity impact. Study quality was assessed with Cochrane's risk-of-bias tool. A narrative synthesis and random-effects meta-analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

We identified 39 studies conducted across 15 countries. Interventions targeted hand hygiene (n = 30) and/or face mask use (n = 12) and used two- or three-arm study designs with passive comparators. Interventions were typically delivered face-to-face and included a median of three behaviour change techniques. The quality of included studies was low. Interventions to increase hand hygiene (k = 6) had a medium, positive effect (d = .62, 95% CI = 0.43-0.80, p < .001, I²  = 81.2%). Interventions targeting face mask use (k = 4) had mixed results, with an imprecise pooled estimate (OR = 4.14, 95% CI = 1.24-13.79, p < .001, I²  = 89.67%). Between-study heterogeneity was high.

CONCLUSIONS

We found low-quality evidence for positive effects of interventions targeting hand hygiene, with unclear results for interventions targeting face mask use. There was a lack of evidence for most behaviours of interest within this review.

Canadian policy changes for alcohol-based hand rubs during the COVID-19 pandemic and unintended risks

The COVID-19 pandemic led to major changes in public policies to address supply chain disruption and escalated the price of consumer disinfectant products. To address market demands on alcohol-based hand rubs and disinfectants, Health Canada implemented major changes to the regulations regarding composition, handling, transportation, and packaging to insure product availability. Furthermore, accelerated licensing of ingredients and packaging did not meet standard medical quality guidelines yet were authorized for manufacturing and packaging of alcohol-based hand rubs and disinfectants. The accountability associated with these policy changes were reactive, including industry self-reporting, consumer reporting, and Health Canada advisories and recalls that were responsive to products after they were available in the market. Nonetheless, Canadian public health policy increased hand sanitizers availability. However, some of the interim policies have raised major public health concerns associated with ethanol quality, packaging, and labeling, and enforcement of regulations. In this paper, we review the changes in the Canadian regulations amid the current pandemic and we evaluate the unintended health risks that might arise from these changes.

Nonpharmacological interventions to reduce respiratory viral transmission: an evidence-based review with recommendations

BACKGROUND

Viral respiratory infections are a leading cause of worldwide mortality and exert the potential to cause global socioeconomic crises. However, inexpensive, efficacious, and rapidly deployable strategies to reduce viral transmission are increasingly important in the setting of an ongoing pandemic, though not entirely understood. This article provides a comprehensive review of commonly employed nonpharmacological interventions to interrupt viral spread and provides evidence-based recommendations for their use.

METHODOLOGY

A systematic review of three databases was performed. Studies with defined endpoints of subjects receiving one of five interventions (nasal washing, gargling, personal protective equipment (PPE), social distancing, and hand hygiene) were included. An evidence-based review of the highest level of evidence, with recommendations, was created in accordance with a previously described, rigorous, iterative process.

RESULTS

Fifty-four primary studies were included. The most commonly studied intervention was hand hygiene, followed by PPE, gargling, saline nasal washing, and social distancing.

CONCLUSIONS

Mask use and hand hygiene are strong recommendations for prevention of viral transmission. Donning gloves, gowns, and eye protection are a recommendation in healthcare settings. Saline nasal washing and gargling are options in selected populations. Although an aggregate level of evidence is not provided, the authors recommend social distancing.

A Systematic Review for Effective Preventive Public Education of Respiratory Infection

The present study aimed to systematically review to find the best available evidence on the efficacy of non-pharmaceutical interventions that have been used in the community so far. Through eight electronic journal database, 9 articles met our inclusion Participants, Intervention, Control, Outcomes, and Study Design (PICOS) criteria based on medical symptoms, interventions, and improvements. In general, interventions included hand hygiene, mask use, health education such as cough etiquette, hand washing and sanitizer methods. In addition, exercise and meditation were performed to improve immunity. As a result, the number of incidents and absences related to respiratory infections were reduced, the frequency and method of handwashing improved, and there were also positive effects in knowledge, attitude/perception, and performance. We concluded that it is necessary to create an environment and systematic support so that organizations or governments can determine healthy behavior at the same time as an individual approach. Furthermore, the follow-up for evaluating the effectiveness of interventions and the monitoring period should be included during the study, consequently resulting in having an opportunity to continuously remind people about health behavior. The community provides information on various types of non-pharmaceutical intervention to maintain healthy management and lifestyles in the public.

Hydrogels in Hand Sanitizers

Hand hygiene can be considered a strategic key useful in the containment of infections such as COVID-19 both at home and in communities because it can dramatically reduce the widespread outbreak of infections. In case of the unavailability of soap and water, "instant" hand sanitizers are recommended because their application can be considered easy, versatile, quick and often less aggressive for the skin. For these reasons, alcoholic and alcohol-free hand rub gels can be considered the best performing formulations on the market. Together with disinfectants and antiseptic agents, hydrogels play a fundamental role in obtaining stable formulations and are easy to disperse, with a pleasant skin feel and an overall good performance. Several compounds commonly used in the pharmaceutical, cosmetic and food industry are available for this purpose, in particular, cellulose derivatives and synthetic polymers derivatives. Each of them is available in several grades, presenting different thickening behavior, rheological properties and compatibility with other ingredients, alcohols in particular. For all these reasons, it is important to explore hydrogel properties and behaviors in different contexts (i.e., hydroalcoholic and aqueous media) in order to develop new and performing hand rub gels, always taking into account the different international legal frameworks regarding disinfectant and sanitizing formulations.

Hand-washing promotion for preventing diarrhoea

BACKGROUND

Diarrhoea accounts for 1.8 million deaths in children in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). One of the identified strategies to prevent diarrhoea is hand washing.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of hand-washing promotion interventions on diarrhoeal episodes in children and adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, nine other databases, the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trial Registry Platform (ICTRP), and metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) on 8 January 2020, together with reference checking, citation searching and contact with study authors to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Individually-randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs that compared the effects of hand-washing interventions on diarrhoea episodes in children and adults with no intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently assessed trial eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risks of bias. We stratified the analyses for child day-care centres or schools, community, and hospital-based settings. Where appropriate, we pooled incidence rate ratios (IRRs) using the generic inverse variance method and a random-effects model with a 95% confidence interval (CI). We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 29 RCTs: 13 trials from child day-care centres or schools in mainly high-income countries (54,471 participants), 15 community-based trials in LMICs (29,347 participants), and one hospital-based trial among people with AIDS in a high-income country (148 participants). All the trials and follow-up assessments were of short-term duration. Hand-washing promotion (education activities, sometimes with provision of soap) at child day-care facilities or schools prevent around one-third of diarrhoea episodes in high-income countries (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.70, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.85; 9 trials, 4664 participants, high-certainty evidence) and may prevent a similar proportion in LMICs, but only two trials from urban Egypt and Kenya have evaluated this (IRR 0.66, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.99; 2 trials, 45,380 participants; low-certainty evidence). Only four trials reported measures of behaviour change, and the methods of data collection were susceptible to bias. In one trial from the USA hand-washing behaviour was reported to improve; and in the trial from Kenya that provided free soap, hand washing did not increase, but soap use did (data not pooled; 3 trials, 1845 participants; low-certainty evidence). Hand-washing promotion among communities in LMICs probably prevents around one-quarter of diarrhoea episodes (IRR 0.71, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.81; 9 trials, 15,950 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). However, six of these nine trials were from Asian settings, with only one trial from South America and two trials from sub-Saharan Africa. In seven trials, soap was provided free alongside hand-washing education, and the overall average effect size was larger than in the two trials which did not provide soap (soap provided: RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.75; 7 trials, 12,646 participants; education only: RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.05; 2 trials, 3304 participants). There was increased hand washing at major prompts (before eating or cooking, after visiting the toilet, or cleaning the baby's bottom) and increased compliance with hand-hygiene procedure (behavioural outcome) in the intervention groups compared with the control in community trials (data not pooled: 4 trials, 3591 participants; high-certainty evidence). Hand-washing promotion for the one trial conducted in a hospital among a high-risk population showed significant reduction in mean episodes of diarrhoea (1.68 fewer) in the intervention group (mean difference -1.68, 95% CI -1.93 to -1.43; 1 trial, 148 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Hand-washing frequency increased to seven times a day in the intervention group versus three times a day in the control arm in this hospital trial (1 trial, 148 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We found no trials evaluating the effects of hand-washing promotions on diarrhoea-related deaths or cost effectiveness.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Hand-washing promotion probably reduces diarrhoea episodes in both child day-care centres in high-income countries and among communities living in LMICs by about 30%. The included trials do not provide evidence about the long-term impact of the interventions.

Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses

BACKGROUND

Viral epidemics or pandemics of acute respiratory infections (ARIs) pose a global threat. Examples are influenza (H1N1) caused by the H1N1pdm09 virus in 2009, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in 2003, and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by SARS-CoV-2 in 2019. Antiviral drugs and vaccines may be insufficient to prevent their spread. This is an update of a Cochrane Review published in 2007, 2009, 2010, and 2011. The evidence summarised in this review does not include results from studies from the current COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of acute respiratory viruses.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL on 1 April 2020. We searched ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO ICTRP on 16 March 2020. We conducted a backwards and forwards citation analysis on the newly included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs of trials investigating physical interventions (screening at entry ports, isolation, quarantine, physical distancing, personal protection, hand hygiene, face masks, and gargling) to prevent respiratory virus transmission. In previous versions of this review we also included observational studies. However, for this update, there were sufficient RCTs to address our study aims.   DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. Three pairs of review authors independently extracted data using a standard template applied in previous versions of this review, but which was revised to reflect our focus on RCTs and cluster-RCTs for this update. We did not contact trialists for missing data due to the urgency in completing the review. We extracted data on adverse events (harms) associated with the interventions.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 44 new RCTs and cluster-RCTs in this update, bringing the total number of randomised trials to 67. There were no included studies conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic. Six ongoing studies were identified, of which three evaluating masks are being conducted concurrent with the COVID pandemic, and one is completed. Many studies were conducted during non-epidemic influenza periods, but several studies were conducted during the global H1N1 influenza pandemic in 2009, and others in epidemic influenza seasons up to 2016. Thus, studies were conducted in the context of lower respiratory viral circulation and transmission compared to COVID-19. The included studies were conducted in heterogeneous settings, ranging from suburban schools to hospital wards in high-income countries; crowded inner city settings in low-income countries; and an immigrant neighbourhood in a high-income country. Compliance with interventions was low in many studies. The risk of bias for the RCTs and cluster-RCTs was mostly high or unclear. Medical/surgical masks compared to no masks We included nine trials (of which eight were cluster-RCTs) comparing medical/surgical masks versus no masks to prevent the spread of viral respiratory illness (two trials with healthcare workers and seven in the community). There is low certainty evidence from nine trials (3507 participants) that wearing a mask may make little or no difference to the outcome of influenza-like illness (ILI) compared to not wearing a mask (risk ratio (RR) 0.99, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 1.18. There is moderate certainty evidence that wearing a mask probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of laboratory-confirmed influenza compared to not wearing a mask (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.26; 6 trials; 3005 participants). Harms were rarely measured and poorly reported. Two studies during COVID-19 plan to recruit a total of 72,000 people. One evaluates medical/surgical masks (N = 6000) (published Annals of Internal Medicine, 18 Nov 2020), and one evaluates cloth masks (N = 66,000). N95/P2 respirators compared to medical/surgical masks We pooled trials comparing N95/P2 respirators with medical/surgical masks (four in healthcare settings and one in a household setting). There is uncertainty over the effects of N95/P2 respirators when compared with medical/surgical masks on the outcomes of clinical respiratory illness (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.10; very low-certainty evidence; 3 trials; 7779 participants) and ILI (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.03; low-certainty evidence; 5 trials; 8407 participants). The evidence is limited by imprecision and heterogeneity for these subjective outcomes. The use of a N95/P2 respirator compared to a medical/surgical mask probably makes little or no difference for the objective and more precise outcome of laboratory-confirmed influenza infection (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.34; moderate-certainty evidence; 5 trials; 8407 participants). Restricting the pooling to healthcare workers made no difference to the overall findings. Harms were poorly measured and reported, but discomfort wearing medical/surgical masks or N95/P2 respirators was mentioned in several studies. One ongoing study recruiting 576 people compares N95/P2 respirators with medical surgical masks for healthcare workers during COVID-19. Hand hygiene compared to control Settings included schools, childcare centres, homes, and offices. In a comparison of hand hygiene interventions with control (no intervention), there was a 16% relative reduction in the number of people with ARIs in the hand hygiene group (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.86; 7 trials; 44,129 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), suggesting a probable benefit. When considering the more strictly defined outcomes of ILI and laboratory-confirmed influenza, the estimates of effect for ILI (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.13; 10 trials; 32,641 participants; low-certainty evidence) and laboratory-confirmed influenza (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.30; 8 trials; 8332 participants; low-certainty evidence) suggest the intervention made little or no difference. We pooled all 16 trials (61,372 participants) for the composite outcome of ARI or ILI or influenza, with each study only contributing once and the most comprehensive outcome reported. The pooled data showed that hand hygiene may offer a benefit with an 11% relative reduction of respiratory illness (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.95; low-certainty evidence), but with high heterogeneity. Few trials measured and reported harms. There are two ongoing studies of handwashing interventions in 395 children outside of COVID-19. We identified one RCT on quarantine/physical distancing. Company employees in Japan were asked to stay at home if household members had ILI symptoms. Overall fewer people in the intervention group contracted influenza compared with workers in the control group (2.75% versus 3.18%; hazard ratio 0.80, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.97). However, those who stayed at home with their infected family members were 2.17 times more likely to be infected. We found no RCTs on eye protection, gowns and gloves, or screening at entry ports.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The high risk of bias in the trials, variation in outcome measurement, and relatively low compliance with the interventions during the studies hamper drawing firm conclusions and generalising the findings to the current COVID-19 pandemic. There is uncertainty about the effects of face masks. The low-moderate certainty of the evidence means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited, and that the true effect may be different from the observed estimate of the effect. The pooled results of randomised trials did not show a clear reduction in respiratory viral infection with the use of medical/surgical masks during seasonal influenza. There were no clear differences between the use of medical/surgical masks compared with N95/P2 respirators in healthcare workers when used in routine care to reduce respiratory viral infection. Hand hygiene is likely to modestly reduce the burden of respiratory illness. Harms associated with physical interventions were under-investigated. There is a need for large, well-designed RCTs addressing the effectiveness of many of these interventions in multiple settings and populations, especially in those most at risk of ARIs.

Fast deployment of COVID-19 disinfectant from common ethanol of gas stations in Brazil

OBJECTIVES

Coronavirus COVID-19 is spreading very fast in Brazil, requiring innovative strategies for the fast deployment of disinfectants. Panic in population triggered by COVID-19 has caused a shortage of alcohol-based hand sanitizers and disinfectants in many cities of Brazil. Despite the governmental reaction against the outbreak, a risk of shortage of disinfectants still exists. The objective of this research is to investigate an alternative method for the fast deployment of alcohol-based disinfectants to protect the population against COVID-19.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This research highlights the feasibility of disinfectant production from common ethanol available in Brazilian gas stations, as a last resort. A four-by-one (4:1) ratio of common alcohol diluted in water meets the minimum requirements set by health agencies for the alcoholic concentration of disinfectants. Risks factors on alcohol dilution process are associated with corresponding measures of risk mitigation for public health and safety.

CONCLUSIONS AND PERSPECTIVES

This research proposes a process for the production and deployment of ethanol-based disinfectant from gas stations. However, the implementation is not timely possible for the COVID-19 pandemic due to complexities in the productive process. For the post-COVID-19 period, the authors give three perspectives: (a) future investigation of human dermal toxicity of common ethanol, (b) establishment of a program for the ethanol decontamination, and (c) countries such as the US, Sweden, Thailand, and Colombia to rethink their energy policy for the adoption of biofuel E100 (ethanol and water) instead of E85 (blend of ethanol, gasoline, and water), as part of their biodefense strategy.

Visibility and transmission: complexities around promoting hand hygiene in young children - a qualitative study

Background

Effective hand hygiene practice can reduce transmission of diseases such as respiratory tract infections (RTIs) and gastrointestinal infections, especially in young children. While hand hygiene has been widely promoted within Australia, primary care providers’ (PCPs) and parents’ understanding of hand hygiene importance, and their views on hand hygiene in reducing transmission of diseases in the community are unclear. Therefore, the aim of this study was to explore the views of PCPs and parents of young children on their knowledge and practice of hand hygiene in disease transmission.

Methods

Using a cross-sectional qualitative research design, we conducted 30 in-depth interviews with PCPs and five focus groups with parents (n = 50) between June 2014 and July 2015 in Melbourne, Australia. Data were thematically analysed.

Results

Participants agreed that hand hygiene practice was important in reducing disease transmissions. However, barriers such as variations of hand hygiene habits, relating visibility to transmission; concerns around young children being obsessed with washing hands; children already being ‘too clean’ and the need to build their immunity through exposure to dirt; and scepticism that hand hygiene practice was achievable in young children, all hindered participants’ motivation to develop good hand hygiene behaviour in young children.

Conclusion

Despite the established benefits of hand hygiene, sustained efforts are needed to ensure its uptake in routine care. To overcome the barriers identified in this study a multifaceted intervention is needed that includes teaching young children good hand hygiene habits, PCPs prompting parents and young children to practice hand hygiene when coming for an RTI consultation, reassuring parents that effective hand hygiene practice will not lead to abnormal psychological behaviour in their children, and community health promotion education campaigns.

Effectiveness of hand hygiene practices in preventing influenza virus infection in the community setting: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Hand hygiene is known to be an effective infection prevention and control measure in health care settings. However, the effectiveness of hand hygiene practices in preventing influenza infection and transmission in the community setting is not clear.

OBJECTIVE

To identify, review and synthesize available evidence on the effectiveness of hand hygiene in preventing laboratory-confirmed or possible influenza infection and transmission in the community setting.

METHODS

A systematic review protocol was established prior to conducting the review. Three electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library) were searched to identify relevant studies. Two reviewers independently screened the titles, abstracts and full-texts of studies retrieved from the database searches for potential eligibility. Data extraction and quality assessment of included studies were performed by a single reviewer and validated by a second reviewer. Included studies were synthesized and analyzed narratively.

RESULTS

A total of 16 studies were included for review. Studies were of low methodological quality and there was high variability in study design, setting, context and outcome measures. Nine studies evaluated the effectiveness of hand hygiene interventions or practices in preventing laboratory-confirmed or possible influenza infection in the community setting; six studies showed a significant difference, three studies did not. Seven studies assessed the effectiveness of hand hygiene practices in preventing laboratory-confirmed or possible influenza transmission in the community setting; two studies found a significant difference and five studies did not.

CONCLUSION

The effectiveness of hand hygiene against influenza virus infection and transmission in the community setting is difficult to determine based on the available evidence. In light of its proven effectiveness in other settings, there is no compelling evidence to stop using good hand hygiene practice to reduce the risk of influenza infection and transmission in the community setting.

Evaluation of health education interventions on Chinese factory workers' knowledge, practices, and behaviors related to infectious disease

BACKGROUND

Workplaces are a common location for infectious disease transmission among adults. To provide recommendations regarding appropriate health promotion programs, we evaluated the impact of three different interventions on factory workers.

METHODS

In a prospective intervention study carried out from October 2012 to June 2013, three factories were selected and each was assigned a different intervention method (i.e. self-study group, manager training group and interactional group discussion group). Participants were scored on their knowledge, behavior, and hygienic practices related to infectious disease prevention both before and after the intervention.

RESULTS

A total of 1154 participants completed the survey before the intervention and 1111 completed the survey after. The sum infectious disease knowledge score in the manager training group was higher after the intervention (9.09/12) than before (8.63/12, t=4.47, p<0.05). There was no significant difference in sum infectious disease knowledge score pre and post intervention for both the self-study group and the interactional group discussion.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, change in health behaviors and hygiene practices were not as affected compared to changes in knowledge after interventions related to infectious disease health promotion. Training managers who then interact with workers may be an effective and efficient way of educating workers on health issues.

Infectious illness prevention and control methods and their effectiveness in non-health workplaces: an integrated literature review

BACKGROUND

Infectious illness in the workplace places a substantial cost burden on employers due to productivity losses from employee absenteeism and presenteeism.

AIM

Given the clear impacts of infectious illness on workplaces, this review aimed to investigate the international literature on the effectiveness and cost-benefit of the strategies non-healthcare workplaces use to prevent and control infectious illnesses in these workplaces.

METHODS

MEDLINE, CINAHL Plus with Fulltext and Business Source Complete were searched concurrently using EBSCO Host 1995-2016.

FINDINGS

Infection prevention and control strategies to reduce workplace infectious illness and absenteeism evaluated in the literature include influenza vaccination programs, use of alcohol-based hand sanitiser and paid sick days. While the reported studies have various methodological flaws, there is good evidence of the effectiveness of influenza vaccination in preventing workplace infectious illness and absences and moderate evidence to support hand hygiene programs.

DISCUSSION

Some studies used more than one intervention concurrently, making it difficult to determine the relative benefit of each individual strategy. Workplace strategies to prevent and control infectious illness transmission may reduce costs and productivity losses experienced by businesses and organisations related to infectious illness absenteeism and presenteeism.

Effect of hand hygiene on infectious diseases in the office workplace: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Extensive data suggests that hand hygiene is a critical intervention for reducing infectious disease transmission in the clinical setting. However, it is unclear whether hand hygiene is effective at cutting down on infectious illnesses in non-clinical workplaces. The aim of this review is to assess the current literature concerning the effects of hand-washing interventions on infectious disease prevention among employees in nonclinical, office-based workplaces.

METHODS

In compiling this review, PubMed, Scopus, and Business Source Premier were examined for studies published from 1960 through 2016.

RESULTS

Eleven studies (eight experimental, two observational, one a simulation) were identified as eligible for inclusion. Hand-hygiene interventions at various levels of rigor were shown to reduce self-reported illness symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Hand hygiene is thought to be more effective against gastrointestinal illness than it is against respiratory illness, but no clear consensus has been reached on this point. Minimal hand-hygiene interventions seem to be effective at reducing the incidence of employee illness. Along with reducing infections among employees, hand-hygiene programs in the workplace may provide additional benefits to employers by reducing the number of employee health insurance claims and improving employee morale. Future research should use objective measures of hand hygiene and illness, and explore economic impacts on employers more fully.

Antibiogram of bacteria isolated from automated teller machines in Hamadan, West Iran

Aim: Bacteria are ubiquitous in the environment. In keeping with the continued expansion of urbanization and the growing population, an increasing number of people use automated banking, i.e. automated teller machines (ATMs). The aim of this study was to investigate the bacterial contamination and its antibiotic sensitivity on computer keyboards located at ATMs in Hamadan province, Iran.

Method: Out of 360 ATMs at four locations in Hamadan, 96 were randomly selected for this study. The antibiotic susceptibility pattern of all isolates was determined by the agar disk diffusion method using gentamicin (10 µg), vancomycin (30 µg), trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (25 µg), amikacin (30 µg), tobramycin (10 µg), cephalotin (30 µg), norfloxacin (5 µg), and ceftizoxim (30 µg) disks.

Results: Melli and Saderat Banks had the most frequently contaminated ATMS, with 18 (27.7%) and 12 (18.5%), respectively. The most frequently isolated bacteria were Staphylococcus epidermidis in 12 (18.5%) ATMs, Pseudomonas aeruginosa in 12 (18.5%), Bacillus subtilis in 11 (16.9%), Escherichia coli in 6 (9.2%), Klebsiella spp. in 8 (12.3%), Enterobacter spp. in 2 (3.1%), Bacillus cereus in 6 (9.2%), Staphylococcus aureus in 3 (4.6%), and Micrococcaceae spp. in 5 (7.69%) cases. All isolated bacteria were susceptible to gentamicin, cephalotin, tobramycin, amikacin, norfloxacin, and vancomycin. The S. aureus resistance rate to trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole was 50%.

Conclusion: All tested ATM keyboards were contaminated with at least one species of bacteria. Based on these findings, it is recommendable to disinfect the hands after entering one’s own apartment, work area or a hospital, in order to hinder the spread of critical pathogens in the personal environment or in the hospital.

Routine chlorhexidine gluconate use onboard navy surface vessels to reduce infection: A cluster randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Hand disinfection with chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) is commonly used for preventing the spread of infection in medical institutions and the community, but studies on its use in military settings have been inconclusive. We examined the effects of CHG on morbidity in Israeli Navy ships.

METHODS

This was a controlled, cluster randomized study that took place at a major naval base in Israel. Ships were randomly selected into the study (347 sailors) and primary control (350 sailors) groups. Additional nonintervention control groups included other sailors serving on the base (n = 360) and logistics and support personnel (n = 859). CHG disinfection devices were installed on all ships in the study group, alongside soap and water. Morbidity was analyzed using a computerized patient record, subjective self-report questionnaires, and a sample of hand cultures. Compliance with hand hygiene was analyzed using a self-report hygiene attitudes questionnaire at the beginning of the trial and after 3 months. The study took place between May and September 2014.

RESULTS

No significant differences were found between the groups in terms of sick days or light-duty days or in the number of acute gastrointestinal or respiratory cases. Sailors were found to have more skin infections than controls, but this was not significantly reduced by CHG. Hand cultures demonstrated that continuous use of CHG did not cause a reduction in colonization. There were no statistically significant differences in self-reported hygiene practices.

CONCLUSIONS

CHG did not demonstrate any medical benefit over the use of soap and water onboard Israeli Navy ships.

Influenza Vaccine Uptake, Hand Hygiene Practices, and Perceived Barriers in Decision Making

The annual costs of influenza are in the billions of dollars, with employers bearing substantial burdens. Yet, influenza vaccine uptake is sub-optimal. A random survey was administered to employees at a Midwestern public university using mixed quantitative and qualitative methods to identify the rate, characteristics, and barriers of self-reported flu vaccine uptake during March-April of 2012. The lowest uptake was among adults, ages 18 to 49 (29.8%), even though they are included in universal recommendations. Multiple regression analysis adjusted for demographic confounders showed an increase in self-identified protective hand hygiene behavior among those who reported influenza vaccine uptake compared with those who did not. Qualitative thematic analysis revealed contextual accounts of why vaccine uptake was declined including structural, perceptual, and knowledge barriers. Implementation and evaluation of novel multicomponent worksite vaccine interventions tailored to reach young and middle-aged employees including utilization of risk communication is needed to facilitate increased uptake.

Impact of a Comprehensive Workplace Hand Hygiene Program on Employer Health Care Insurance Claims and Costs, Absenteeism, and Employee Perceptions and Practices

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of a multimodal hand hygiene intervention program in reducing health care insurance claims for hygiene preventable infections (eg, cold and influenza), absenteeism, and subjective impact on employees.

METHODS

A 13.5-month prospective, randomized cluster controlled trial was executed with alcohol-based hand sanitizer in strategic workplace locations and personal use (intervention group) and brief hand hygiene education (both groups). Four years of retrospective data were collected for all participants.

RESULTS

Hygiene-preventable health care claims were significantly reduced in the intervention group by over 20% (P < 0.05). Absenteeism was positively impacted overall for the intervention group. Employee survey data showed significant improvements in hand hygiene behavior and perception of company concern for employee well-being.

CONCLUSION

Providing a comprehensive, targeted, yet simple to execute hand hygiene program significantly reduced the incidence of health care claims and increased employee workplace satisfaction.

The healthy workplace project: Reduced viral exposure in an office setting

Viral illnesses such as gastroenteritis and the common cold create a substantial burden in the workplace due to reduced productivity, increased absenteeism, and increased health care costs. Behaviors in the workplace contribute to the spread of human viruses via direct contact between hands, contaminated surfaces, and the mouth, eyes, and/or nose. This study assessed whether implementation of the Healthy Workplace Project (HWP) (providing hand sanitizers, disinfecting wipes, facial tissues, and use instructions) would reduce viral loads in an office setting of approximately 80 employees after seeding fomites and the hands of volunteer participants with an MS-2 phage tracer. The HWP significantly reduced viable phage detected on participants' hands, communal fomites, and personal fomites (p ≤ .010) in office environments and presents a cost-effective method for reducing the health and economic burden associated with viral illnesses in the workplace.

ACG Clinical Guideline: Diagnosis, Treatment, and Prevention of Acute Diarrheal Infections in Adults

Acute diarrheal infections are a common health problem globally and among both individuals in the United States and traveling to developing world countries. Multiple modalities including antibiotic and non-antibiotic therapies have been used to address these common infections. Information on treatment, prevention, diagnostics, and the consequences of acute diarrhea infection has emerged and helps to inform clinical management. In this ACG Clinical Guideline, the authors present an evidence-based approach to diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of acute diarrhea infection in both US-based and travel settings.

Outcomes of a pilot hand hygiene randomized cluster trial to reduce communicable infections among US office-based employees

Objective:

To determine the effectiveness of an office-based multimodal hand hygiene improvement intervention in reducing self-reported communicable infections and work-related absence.

Methods:

A randomized cluster trial including an electronic training video, hand sanitizer, and educational posters (n = 131, intervention; n = 193, control). Primary outcomes include (1) self-reported acute respiratory infections (ARIs)/influenza-like illness (ILI) and/or gastrointestinal (GI) infections during the prior 30 days; and (2) related lost work days. Incidence rate ratios calculated using generalized linear mixed models with a Poisson distribution, adjusted for confounders and random cluster effects.

Results:

A 31% relative reduction in self-reported combined ARI-ILI/GI infections (incidence rate ratio: 0.69; 95% confidence interval, 0.49 to 0.98). A 21% nonsignificant relative reduction in lost work days.

Conclusions:

An office-based multimodal hand hygiene improvement intervention demonstrated a substantive reduction in self-reported combined ARI-ILI/GI infections.

Impact of the use of an alcohol-based hand sanitizer in the home on reduction in probability of infection by respiratory and enteric viruses

The goal of this study was to determine the reduction in risk of infection by viruses with the use of an alcohol-based hand sanitizer, used in addition to routine hand washing, in family members in households. A quantitative microbial risk model was used to determine the probability of infection from the concentration of virus on the hands. The model incorporated variation in hand size, frequency of touching orifices (nose, mouth, eyes), and percent transfer to the site of infection, as well as, dose-response for each virus. Data on the occurrence of virus on household members' hands from an intervention study using MS-2 coliphage was used to determine the reduction of viruses on the hands pre- and post-intervention. It was found that the risk of rhinovirus, rotavirus or norovirus infection after the intervention was reduced by 47-98% depending upon the initial concentration of virus on the hands.

Hand washing promotion for preventing diarrhoea

BACKGROUND

Diarrhoea accounts for 1.8 million deaths in children in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). One of the identified strategies to prevent diarrhoea is hand washing.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of hand washing promotion interventions on diarrhoeal episodes in children and adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register (27 May 2015); CENTRAL (published in the Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 5); MEDLINE (1966 to 27 May 2015); EMBASE (1974 to 27 May 2015); LILACS (1982 to 27 May 2015); PsycINFO (1967 to 27 May 2015); Science Citation Index and Social Science Citation Index (1981 to 27 May 2015); ERIC (1966 to 27 May 2015); SPECTR (2000 to 27 May 2015); Bibliomap (1990 to 27 May 2015); RoRe, The Grey Literature (2002 to 27 May 2015); World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trial Registry Platform (ICTRP), metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT), and reference lists of articles up to 27 May 2015. We also contacted researchers and organizations in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Individually randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs that compared the effects of hand washing interventions on diarrhoea episodes in children and adults with no intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently assessed trial eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We stratified the analyses for child day-care centres or schools, community, and hospital-based settings. Where appropriate, incidence rate ratios (IRR) were pooled using the generic inverse variance method and random-effects model with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We used the GRADE approach to assess the quality of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 22 RCTs: 12 trials from child day-care centres or schools in mainly high-income countries (54,006 participants), nine community-based trials in LMICs (15,303 participants), and one hospital-based trial among people with acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) (148 participants).Hand washing promotion (education activities, sometimes with provision of soap) at child day-care facilities or schools prevents around one-third of diarrhoea episodes in high income countries (rate ratio 0.70; 95% CI 0.58 to 0.85; nine trials, 4664 participants, high quality evidence), and may prevent a similar proportion in LMICs but only two trials from urban Egypt and Kenya have evaluated this (rate ratio 0.66, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.99; two trials, 45,380 participants, low quality evidence). Only three trials reported measures of behaviour change and the methods of data collection were susceptible to bias. In one trial from the USA hand washing behaviour was reported to improve; and in the trial from Kenya that provided free soap, hand washing did not increase, but soap use did (data not pooled; three trials, 1845 participants, low quality evidence).Hand washing promotion among communities in LMICs probably prevents around one-quarter of diarrhoea episodes (rate ratio 0.72, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.83; eight trials, 14,726 participants, moderate quality evidence). However, six of these eight trials were from Asian settings, with only single trials from South America and sub-Saharan Africa. In six trials, soap was provided free alongside hand washing education, and the overall average effect size was larger than in the two trials which did not provide soap (soap provided: rate ratio 0.66, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.78; six trials, 11,422 participants; education only: rate ratio: 0.84, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.05; two trials, 3304 participants). There was increased hand washing at major prompts (before eating/cooking, after visiting the toilet or cleaning the baby's bottom), and increased compliance to hand hygiene procedure (behavioural outcome) in the intervention groups than the control in community trials (data not pooled: three trials, 3490 participants, high quality evidence).Hand washing promotion for the one trial conducted in a hospital among high-risk population showed significant reduction in mean episodes of diarrhoea (1.68 fewer) in the intervention group (Mean difference 1.68, 95% CI 1.93 to 1.43; one trial, 148 participants, moderate quality evidence). There was increase in hand washing frequency, seven times per day in the intervention group versus three times in the control in this hospital trial (one trial, 148 participants, moderate quality evidence).We found no trials evaluating or reporting the effects of hand washing promotions on diarrhoea-related deaths, all-cause-under five mortality, or costs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Hand washing promotion probably reduces diarrhoea episodes in both child day-care centres in high-income countries and among communities living in LMICs by about 30%. However, less is known about how to help people maintain hand washing habits in the longer term.

Hand hygiene and risk of influenza virus infections in the community: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Community-based prevention strategies for seasonal and pandemic influenza are essential to minimize their potential threat to public health. Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy of hand hygiene interventions in reducing influenza transmission in the community and to investigate the possible modifying effects of latitude, temperature and humidity on hand hygiene efficacy. We identified 979 articles in the initial search and 10 randomized controlled trials met our inclusion criteria. The combination of hand hygiene with facemasks was found to have statistically significant efficacy against laboratory-confirmed influenza while hand hygiene alone did not. Our meta-regression model did not identify statistically significant effects of latitude, temperature or humidity on the efficacy of hand hygiene. Our findings highlight the potential importance of interventions that protect against multiple modes of influenza transmission, and the modest efficacy of hand hygiene suggests that additional measures besides hand hygiene may also be important to control influenza.

Hand hygiene performance and beliefs among public university employees

The workplace is an important location to access community members, and employers have a direct interest in employee well-being. A survey administered to a random sample of employees at a Midwestern US university tested the ability of a model informed by the theory of planned behavior to predict hand hygiene practices and beliefs using structural equation modeling. Questions demonstrated acceptable validity and reliability. Constructs predicted self-reported hand hygiene behaviors, and hand hygiene behaviors reduced the odds of reporting sickness from respiratory tract and gastrointestinal infections. The findings support multi-modal hand hygiene improvement interventions.

Impact of health campaign on hand hygiene with alcohol-based hand rubs in a non-clinical setting

BACKGROUND

Hand hygiene has been acknowledged as the single most important measure to prevent nosocomial infections. Likewise, for non-clinical settings, hand hygiene is recognized as a key element to prevent the spread of infectious diseases, nevertheless poor compliance has been documented. The feasibility of hand hygiene interventions in open-community settings with adults is mostly unclear.

AIM

To investigate the acceptability and feasibility of a health campaign to promote hand hygiene with alcohol-based hand disinfectants at workplaces in a non-clinical setting.

METHODS

The surveys were conducted as part of a prospective, controlled intervention study with volunteers from the administration of the Ernst-Moritz-Arndt-University Greifswald, the municipality of Greifswald and the state of Mecklenburg-West Pomerania. Participants in the intervention group were provided with alcohol-based hand disinfection; the control group was unchanged. Eleven volunteers filled out an initial survey at the beginning of the intervention regarding demographic and health-related questions as well as questions about the type of work, and a survey after completion of the intervention to evaluate the study's impact on the participants' attitudes toward hand hygiene. Participants in the experimental group filled out a monthly questionnaire regarding their compliance with hand hygiene measures, feasibility of hand disinfection and possible side-effects.

FINDINGS

From 850 employees asked to participate, 134 were included in the study, and surveys from 129 participants (intervention: 64 vs control: 65) were accepted for analysis. Overall, datasets of 1230 person-months (79.46% of total possible follow-up surveys) were collected. Return rate and compliance remained high during the study period. Hand disinfection did not lead to skin problems in the majority of person-months. After the intervention, a majority of participants would favour a further use of hand disinfectants.

CONCLUSION

Campaigns that enforce the use of alcohol-based hand disinfectants can have a sustainable effect on the compliance with hand hygiene measures in non-clinical settings. Campaigns have been shown to be feasible and effective in the prevention of transmissible diseases, therefore employers should consider whether hand hygiene campaigns to introduce waterless hand rubs could be included in companies' health programmes.

A large-scale assessment of hand hygiene quality and the effectiveness of the "WHO 6-steps"

BACKGROUND

Hand hygiene compliance is generally assessed by observation of adherence to the "WHO five moments" using numbers of opportunities as the denominator. The quality of the activity is usually not monitored since there is no established methodology for the routine assessment of hand hygiene technique. The aim of this study was to objectively assess hand rub coverage of staff using a novel imaging technology and to look for patterns and trends in missed areas after the use of WHO's 6 Step technique.

METHODS

A hand hygiene education and assessment program targeted 5200 clinical staff over 7 days at the National University Hospital, Singapore. Participants in small groups were guided by professional trainers through 5 educational stations, which included technique-training and UV light assessment supported by digital photography of hands. Objective criteria for satisfactory hand hygiene quality were defined a priori. The database of images created during the assessment program was analyzed subsequently. Patterns of poor hand hygiene quality were identified and linked to staff demographic.

RESULTS

Despite the assessment taking place immediately after the training, only 72% of staff achieved satisfactory coverage. Failure to adequately clean the dorsal and palmar aspects of the hand occurred in 24% and 18% of the instances, respectively. Fingertips were missed by 3.5% of subjects. The analysis based on 4642 records showed that nurses performed best (77% pass), and women performed better than men (75% vs. 62%, p<0.001). Further risk indicators have been identified regarding age and occupation.

CONCLUSION

Ongoing education and training has a vital role in improving hand hygiene compliance and technique of clinical staff. Identification of typical sites of failure can help to develop improved training.

Workplace hand hygiene and wellness: a survey of knowledge, beliefs, and practices

Community hand hygiene interventions have reduced the spread of infectious disease in elementary schools, daycare centers, and private homes. Despite this success, and the potential for reducing workplace absenteeism and presenteeism, few peer-reviewed hand hygiene intervention studies among workers have been published. This research used the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) to guide the development of a model to understand and predict motivations for performing hand hygiene, and to examine related illness, absenteeism, and presenteeism among employees from 39 bank branches in Ohio. Although the TPB has been used extensively to elucidate hand hygiene practices among employees in the health care and food industries, little is known about the ability of the TPB to predict hand hygiene practices among workers in public settings. These survey findings indicate a need for hand hygiene improvement, and support the use of attitudinal beliefs and social norms to guide multimodal approaches for workplace hand hygiene interventions.

Sustained improvements in handwashing indicators more than 5 years after a cluster-randomised, community-based trial of handwashing promotion in Karachi, Pakistan

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate handwashing behaviour 5 years after a handwashing intervention in Karachi, Pakistan.

METHODS

In 2003, we randomised neighbourhoods to control, handwashing promotion, or handwashing promotion and water treatment. Intervention households were given soap +/- water treatment product and weekly handwashing education for 9 months. In 2009, we re-enrolled 461 households from the three study groups: control (160), handwashing (141), and handwashing + water treatment (160) and assessed hygiene-related outcomes, accounting for clustering.

RESULTS

Intervention households were 3.4 times more likely than controls to have soap at their handwashing stations during the study visit [293/301 (97%) vs. 45/159 (28%), P < 0.0001]. While nearly all households reported handwashing after toileting, intervention households more commonly reported handwashing before cooking [relative risk (RR) 1.2 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.0-1.4)] and before meals [RR 1.7 (95% CI, 1.3-2.1)]. Control households cited a mean of 3.87 occasions for washing hands; handwashing households, 4.74 occasions; and handwashing + water treatment households, 4.78 occasions (P < 0.0001). Households reported purchasing a mean of 0.65 (control), 0.91 (handwashing) and 1.1 (handwashing + water treatment) bars of soap/person/month (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Five years after receiving handwashing promotion, intervention households were more likely to have soap at the household handwashing station, know key times to wash hands and report purchasing more soap than controls, suggesting habituation of improved handwashing practices in this population. Intensive handwashing promotion may be an effective strategy for habituating hygiene behaviours and improving health.

Hand hygiene to reduce community transmission of influenza and acute respiratory tract infection: a systematic review

Hand hygiene may be associated with modest protection against some acute respiratory tract infections, but its specific role in influenza transmission in different settings is unclear. We aimed to review evidence that improving hand hygiene reduces primary and secondary transmission of (i) influenza and (ii) acute respiratory tract infections in community settings. We searched Medline, Embase, Global Health and Cochrane databases up to 13 February 2012 for reports in any language of original research investigating the effect of hand hygiene on influenza or acute respiratory tract infection where aetiology was unspecified in community settings including institutions such as schools, and domestic residences. Data were presented and quality rated across outcomes according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Sixteen articles met inclusion criteria. There was moderate to low-quality evidence of a reduction in both influenza and respiratory tract infection with hand hygiene interventions in schools, greatest in a lower-middle-income setting. There was high-quality evidence of a small reduction in respiratory infection in childcare settings. There was high-quality evidence for a large reduction in respiratory infection with a hand hygiene intervention in squatter settlements in a low-income setting. There was moderate- to high-quality evidence of no effect on secondary transmission of influenza in households that had already experienced an index case. While hand hygiene interventions have potential to reduce transmission of influenza and acute respiratory tract infections, their effectiveness varies depending on setting, context and compliance.

Prevention of acute otitis media using currently available vaccines

Acute otitis media (AOM) is common in infants and children. Although approximately two-thirds of cases are due to bacteria, almost all of the episodes are preceded by upper respiratory viral infection. Several viruses, among which respiratory syncytial virus is the most common, are involved in the determination of AOM. However, a significant number of AOM cases are associated with influenza infection, and influenza viruses are among the most frequently found respiratory viruses in the middle ear fluid during an acute episode of AOM. Consequently, influenza vaccination may have a favorable impact on the incidence and course of AOM. Moreover, as Streptococcus pneumoniae is one of the leading AOM bacterial pathogens and it is well known that influenza virus infection predisposes to pneumococcal infection, there is a further reason to suggest the use of influenza vaccine to reduce the risk of AOM. On the other hand, the administration of pneumococcal conjugate vaccine is considered per se a possible means of reducing the incidence of the disease. However, although a number of studies have measured the impact of both vaccines on AOM, it is still not known whether (and to what extent) they are really effective, nor what impact the more recently licensed vaccines may have. The aim of this review is to examine the clinical impact of vaccinations on AOM.

Hand washing with soap and water together with behavioural recommendations prevents infections in common work environment: an open cluster-randomized trial

Background

Hand hygiene is considered as an important means of infection control. We explored whether guided hand hygiene together with transmission-limiting behaviour reduces infection episodes and lost days of work in a common work environment in an open cluster-randomized 3-arm intervention trial.

Methods

A total of 21 clusters (683 persons) were randomized to implement hand hygiene with soap and water (257 persons), with alcohol-based hand rub (202 persons), or to serve as a control (224 persons). Participants in both intervention arms also received standardized instructions on how to limit the transmission of infections. The intervention period (16 months) included the emergence of the 2009 influenza pandemic and the subsequent national hand hygiene campaign influencing also the control arm.

Results

In the total follow-up period there was a 6.7% reduction of infection episodes in the soap-and water arm (p = 0.04). Before the onset of the anti-pandemic campaign, a statistically significant (p = 0.002) difference in the mean occurrence of infection episodes was observed between the control (6.0 per year) and the soap-and-water arm (5.0 per year) but not between the control and the alcohol-rub arm (5.6 per year). Neither intervention had a decreasing effect on absence from work.

Conclusions

We conclude that intensified hand hygiene using water and soap together with behavioural recommendations can reduce the occurrence of self-reported acute illnesses in common work environment. Surprisingly, the occurrence of reported sick leaves also increased in the soap-and water-arm.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00981877

Source of funding

The Finnish Work Environment Fund and the National Institute for Health and Welfare.

Back to the future: rising to the Semmelweis challenge in hand hygiene

Hand hygiene is the single most important intervention for reducing healthcare associated infections and preventing the spread of antimicrobial resistance. This sentence begins most publications regarding hand hygiene in the medical literature. But why - as we mark 150 years since the publication of Ignaz Semmelweis' landmark monograph on the subject - do we continue to repeat it? One might be tempted to regard it as a truism. However, while tremendous progress has certainly been made in this field, a significant amount of work is yet to be done in both strengthening the evidence regarding the impact of hand hygiene and maximizing its implementation. Hand hygiene cannot yet be taken for granted. This article summarizes historical perspectives, dynamics of microbial colonization and efficacy of hand cleansing methods and agents, elements and impacts of successful hand hygiene promotion, as well as scale-up and sustainability. We also explore hand hygiene myths and current challenges such as monitoring, behavior change, patient participation and research priorities.

Modeling the decline in pneumococcal acute otitis media following the introduction of pneumococcal conjugate vaccines in the US

We hypothesized that following the introduction of PCV7, the exchange of vaccine serotypes (VST) for non-vaccine serotypes (NVST) in the nasopharynx has resulted in fewer episodes of pneumococcal acute otitis media (AOM) due to the reduced capacity for common NVST strains to cause disease. We modeled the change in the proportion of children colonized with S. pneumoniae who would develop pneumococcal AOM that would occur due to serotype replacement, and projected the future impact of PCV13. Our model is based on observed changes in the nasopharyngeal pneumococcal serotype distribution from the pre- to post-PCV7 era, and an estimated capacity of each serotype to produce pneumococcal AOM given colonization; the latter was derived by dividing serotype-specific disease prevalence by serotype-specific carriage prevalence in the same population. Our results indicate a 12% (95% CI 0.5-26) decline in the number of AOM episodes attributable to S. pneumoniae in children less than 3 years of age between 2000 and 2007 due to the combined effects of PCV7 vaccine efficacy and vaccine-induced serotype replacement, and predicts that PCV13 will further decrease pneumococcal AOM an additional 27% (95% CI 13-40) from 2007 to 2013. Evaluation of changes in VST disease revealed a 91% (95% CI 83-97) decrease in PCV7-VST AOM from 2000 to 2007, and predicted an additional 65% (95% CI 57-74) decrease in PCV13-VST AOM from 2007 to 2013. Our model indicates that following vaccination, nasopharyngeal replacement of VST by NVST has led to a decrease in the amount of pneumococcal AOM despite a consistent rate of S. pneumoniae colonization, and that pneumococcal AOM may continue to decrease as pneumococcal serotypes with greater capacity to cause disease are replaced by less locally invasive serotypes.

Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses

BACKGROUND

Viral epidemics or pandemics of acute respiratory infections like influenza or severe acute respiratory syndrome pose a global threat. Antiviral drugs and vaccinations may be insufficient to prevent their spread.

OBJECTIVES

To review the effectiveness of physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched The Cochrane Library, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2010, Issue 3), which includes the Acute Respiratory Infections Group's Specialised Register, MEDLINE (1966 to October 2010), OLDMEDLINE (1950 to 1965), EMBASE (1990 to October 2010), CINAHL (1982 to October 2010), LILACS (2008 to October 2010), Indian MEDLARS (2008 to October 2010) and IMSEAR (2008 to October 2010).

SELECTION CRITERIA

In this update, two review authors independently applied the inclusion criteria to all identified and retrieved articles and extracted data. We scanned 3775 titles, excluded 3560 and retrieved full papers of 215 studies, to include 66 papers of 67 studies. We included physical interventions (screening at entry ports, isolation, quarantine, social distancing, barriers, personal protection, hand hygiene) to prevent respiratory virus transmission. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cohorts, case-controls, before-after and time series studies.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used a standardised form to assess trial eligibility. We assessed RCTs by randomisation method, allocation generation, concealment, blinding and follow up. We assessed non-RCTs for potential confounders and classified them as low, medium and high risk of bias.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 67 studies including randomised controlled trials and observational studies with a mixed risk of bias. A total number of participants is not included as the total would be made up of a heterogenous set of observations (participant people, observations on participants and countries (object of some studies)). The risk of bias for five RCTs and most cluster-RCTs was high. Observational studies were of mixed quality. Only case-control data were sufficiently homogeneous to allow meta-analysis. The highest quality cluster-RCTs suggest respiratory virus spread can be prevented by hygienic measures, such as handwashing, especially around younger children. Benefit from reduced transmission from children to household members is broadly supported also in other study designs where the potential for confounding is greater. Nine case-control studies suggested implementing transmission barriers, isolation and hygienic measures are effective at containing respiratory virus epidemics. Surgical masks or N95 respirators were the most consistent and comprehensive supportive measures. N95 respirators were non-inferior to simple surgical masks but more expensive, uncomfortable and irritating to skin. Adding virucidals or antiseptics to normal handwashing to decrease respiratory disease transmission remains uncertain. Global measures, such as screening at entry ports, led to a non-significant marginal delay in spread. There was limited evidence that social distancing was effective, especially if related to the risk of exposure.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Simple and low-cost interventions would be useful for reducing transmission of epidemic respiratory viruses. Routine long-term implementation of some measures assessed might be difficult without the threat of an epidemic.