Implications of a US study on infection prevention and control in community settings in the UK

Barriers and facilitators to infection prevention practices in home healthcare: a scoping review and proposed implementation framework

Infection prevention and control (IPC) research has focused on the hospital setting, neglecting the rapidly expanding home healthcare (HHC) sector. Current infection prevention recommendations do not reflect the challenges specific to the HHC setting. This scoping review considered any original studies reporting on barriers or facilitators to infection prevention practices in the context of HHC. Study characteristics were mapped, and a descriptive content analysis was performed. Based on the findings we propose a framework of eight HHC setting characteristics relevant to infection prevention implementation. 33 studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria. A majority of studies addressed sharps injury or blood and body fluid exposure prevention (N=15) and the majority were conducted in the United States (N=23). Study methodologies employed were surveys (N=18), qualitative (N=11), direct observation (N=7), and one interventional study. The HHC setting characteristics relevant to infection prevention implementation were: the care process in the patient's immediate environment; the need to bring equipment and materials into the home; the provision and financing of equipment and materials; the use of patient space and facilities; the unique position of and the expectations towards HHC providers; working alone with little support; the intermittent nature of care; the attitudes of HHC providers formed by their work circumstances. Interventional studies generating higher-quality evidence for implementation are lacking. Furthermore, implementation of aseptic technique and the decontamination and reprocessing of equipment are poorly studied in the HHC setting and deserve more research interest. The proposed framework may guide future research and implementation work.

Barriers to infection prevention and control in patients' homes

While there is a lot of emphasis on the need for good infection prevention and control practices and acute care, the increasing complexity of patients being cared for in their own homes means that there is an increased risk for infection. Good practice is required by community nurses to minimise this risk. Patients' own homes can present particular challenges in complying with good practice and this article looks at some of the barriers to optimum infection prevention and control precautions in this setting.

Ensuring effective infection prevention and control in the community

Managing community-acquired infections remains an ongoing challenge for community nursing teams. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic meant that community nurses had to ensure they were using evidence-based infection prevention and control measures to limit the effects of the pandemic and maintain patient safety. Community environments can be unpredictable, and compared with acute settings nurses will often lack the appropriate resources when visiting patients in their homes or in residential care. This article outlines effective infection prevention and control measures that nurses can implement in the community, such as the appropriate use of personal protective equipment, optimal hand hygiene, safe waste management and adherence to an aseptic technique.

A systematic review of observational methods used to quantify personal protective behaviours among members of the public during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the concordance between observational and self-report measures in infectious disease health protection

OBJECTIVES

To assess the quantity and quality of studies using an observational measure of behaviour during the COVID-19 pandemic, and to narratively describe the association between self-report and observational data for behaviours relevant to controlling an infectious disease outbreak.

DESIGN

Systematic review and narrative synthesis of observational studies.

DATA SOURCES

We searched Medline, Embase, PsychInfo, Publons, Scopus and the UK Health Security Agency behavioural science LitRep database from inception to 17th September 2021 for relevant studies.

STUDY SELECTION

We included studies which collected observational data of at least one of three health protective behaviours (hand hygiene, face covering use and maintaining physical distance from others ('social distancing') during the COVID-19 pandemic. Studies where observational data were compared to self-report data in relation to any infectious disease were also included.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

We evaluated the quality of studies using the NIH quality assessment scale for observational studies, extracted data on sample size, setting and adherence to health protective behaviours, and synthesized results narratively.

RESULTS

Of 27,279 published papers on COVID-19 relevant health protective behaviours that included one or more terms relating to hand hygiene, face covering and social distancing, we identified 48 studies that included an objective observational measure. Of these, 35 assessed face covering use, 17 assessed hand hygiene behaviour and seven assessed physical distancing. The general quality of these studies was good. When expanding the search to all infectious diseases, we included 21 studies that compared observational versus self-report data. These almost exclusively studied hand hygiene. The difference in outcomes was striking, with self-report over-estimating observed adherence by up to a factor of five in some settings. In only four papers did self-report match observational data in any domains.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite their importance in controlling the pandemic, we found remarkably few studies assessing protective behaviours by observation, rather than self-report, though these studies tended to be of reasonably good quality. Observed adherence tends to be substantially lower than estimates obtained via self-report. Accurate assessment of levels of personal protective behaviour, and evaluation of interventions to increase this, would benefit from the use of observational methods.

Infection prevention and control practice among home-care nursing agencies in Japan: Secondary analysis of a nationwide cross-sectional survey

Aim

We describe the nationwide situation of infection prevention and control (IPC) practices among home‐visit nursing agencies and compare them by agency size to explore whether these practices are associated with the occurrence of infection.

Methods

We conducted a secondary analysis using data from a cross‐sectional nationwide survey inspecting patient safety and IPC practices among nationwide home‐visit nursing agencies, from March to April 2020. Among 9978 agencies, 580 responded and 370 were incorporated in the analysis. The self‐administered questionnaire inquired about the IPC policy and administrative structure, education and training, adherence to standard precautions, and employee health programs. We described the adherence to IPC practice at the agency level and compared them by agency size using chi‐squared tests. Logistic regression analysis was performed to explore the associations between IPC practices and incidence of infection.

Results

Adherence to IPC practices ranged from 19.2% to 92.4% and varied according to agency size. Less than 20% of agencies had instituted a committee for IPC and strictly used disposable aprons when changing patients' diapers. Instituting a committee for IPC (odds ratio 2.19, 95% confidence interval 1.11–4.34, P < 0.05) and training staff for infection prevention (odds ratio 1.67, 95% confidence interval 1.02–2.72, P < 0.01) were significantly associated with the incidence of infection, after adjusting for covariates.

Conclusions

There are challenges in establishing IPC policies and administrative structures and adhering to standard precautions. Well‐organized agencies were found to be more likely to detect infections occurring over the past 3 months. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2021; 21: 913–918.