A review of isolation practices and procedures in healthcare settings

RETRACTED: Safety climate, quality of care, adherence to and compliance with standard precautions among nurses: Structural equation modeling

AIMS

The aim was to investigate the interrelationships of nurses' safety climate, quality of care, and adherence to and compliance with standard precautions (SPs).

BACKGROUND

Investigations about nurses' safety climate and quality care and their association with adherence to and compliance with SPs remain remarkably scant across literature, specifically among developing countries like the Philippines.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional design and structural equation modeling (SEM) approach while complying with STROBE guidelines.

METHODS

Participant nurses were recruited using convenience sampling (n = 870). Four validated self-report instruments were used to collect data from February to August 2022. Spearman rho, SEM, mediation, and path analyses were employed for data analysis.

RESULTS

The emerging model showed acceptable model fit parameters. The safety climate positively influenced the quality of care and adherence to and compliance with SPs. Quality of care directly affected adherence to SPs, while adherence to SPs directly affected compliance with SPs. The quality of care mediated the relationship between safety climate and adherence to SPs. Whereas adherence to SPs mediated the relationships between safety climate and compliance with SPs and the quality of care and compliance with SPs.

CONCLUSIONS

Nurses' safety climate directly affected the quality of care and SPs adherence and compliance. The quality of care mediated the impact of safety climate on SPs adherence. Finally, SPs adherence demonstrated a mediating effect among quality of care, safety climate, and SPs compliance.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING POLICY AND PRACTICE

Nursing policymakers and administrators can use the findings to design strategic policies and sustainable in-service educational courses fostering and maintaining nurses' safety climate, quality of care, and SPs adherence and compliance.

Evaluation of a COVID-19 fundamental nursing care guideline versus usual care: The COVID-NURSE cluster randomized controlled trial

AIM

To evaluate the impact of usual care plus a fundamental nursing care guideline compared to usual care only for patients in hospital with COVID-19 on patient experience, care quality, functional ability, treatment outcomes, nurses' moral distress, patient health-related quality of life and cost-effectiveness.

DESIGN

Parallel two-arm, cluster-level randomized controlled trial.

METHODS

Between 18th January and 20th December 2021, we recruited (i) adults aged 18 years and over with COVID-19, excluding those invasively ventilated, admitted for at least three days or nights in UK Hospital Trusts; (ii) nurses caring for them. We randomly assigned hospitals to use a fundamental nursing care guideline and usual care or usual care only. Our patient-reported co-primary outcomes were the Relational Aspects of Care Questionnaire and four scales from the Quality from the Patient Perspective Questionnaire. We undertook intention-to-treat analyses.

RESULTS

We randomized 15 clusters and recruited 581 patient and 418 nurse participants. Primary outcome data were available for 570-572 (98.1%-98.5%) patient participants in 14 clusters. We found no evidence of between-group differences on any patient, nurse or economic outcomes. We found between-group differences over time, in favour of the intervention, for three of our five co-primary outcomes, and a significant interaction on one primary patient outcome for ethnicity (white British vs. other) and allocated group in favour of the intervention for the 'other' ethnicity subgroup.

CONCLUSION

We did not detect an overall difference in patient experience for a fundamental nursing care guideline compared to usual care. We have indications the guideline may have aided sustaining good practice over time and had a more positive impact on non-white British patients' experience of care.

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE

We cannot recommend the wholescale implementation of our guideline into routine nursing practice. Further intervention development, feasibility, pilot and evaluation studies are required.

IMPACT

Fundamental nursing care drives patient experience but is severely impacted in pandemics. Our guideline was not superior to usual care, albeit it may sustain good practice and have a positive impact on non-white British patients' experience of care.

REPORTING METHOD

CONSORT and CONSERVE.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Patients with experience of hospitalization with COVID-19 were involved in guideline development and writing, trial management and interpretation of findings.

Nurses' safety climate, quality of care, and standard precautions adherence and compliance: A cross-sectional study

INTRODUCTION

Investigations about the interrelationships of nurses' safety climate, quality of care, and standard precautions (SP) adherence and compliance remain particularly scarce in the literature. Thus, we tested a model of the associations between nurses' safety climate, quality of care, and the factors influencing adherence and compliance with SPs utilizing the structural equation modeling (SEM) approach.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional design complying with STROBE guidelines.

METHODS

Using convenience sampling, nurses (n = 730) from the Philippines were recruited. Data were collected between April and September 2022 using four validated self-report measures. Spearman Rho, mediation and path analyses, and SEM were employed for data analysis.

RESULTS

Acceptable model fit indices were shown by the emerging model. The safety climate is positively associated with quality of care and factors influencing adherence to and compliance with SPs. Quality of care directly affected factors influencing adherence to SPs. The factors influencing adherence to SPs directly affected SP compliance. Quality of care mediated between safety climate and the factors influencing adherence to SPs. Factors influencing adherence to SPs mediated between safety climate, quality of care, and SP compliance.

CONCLUSIONS

The study's variables are not distinct but overlapping nursing concepts that must be examined collectively. Nurse administrators can utilize the emerging model to formulate strategies and regulations for evaluating and enhancing nurses' safety climate, quality of care, and SP adherence and compliance.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Our findings may impact policymaking, organizational, and individual levels to improve nurses' clinical practice.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

This study had no patient contribution or public funding.

Hospital patient experiences of contact isolation for antimicrobial resistant organisms in relation to health care-associated infections: A systematic review and narrative synthesis of the evidence

BACKGROUND

The alarming growth of antimicrobial resistance organisms (AMRs) and the threat caused by health care-associated infections require hospitalized individuals who are infected or colonized with AMRs to be cared for in isolation, predominantly in single rooms. None of the existing reviews focus on or specifically address the patient's experience of being cared for in contact isolation when affected by AMRs exploring this specific context.

METHODS

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidance for the conduct of systematic reviews was applied. Five databases were searched from inception to April 2019, with keywords related to adult patient experiences, AMR, and contact isolation. The evidence was certified by 2 reviewers. Principles of thematic analysis were used to produce a narrative synthesis of the findings.

RESULTS

Eighteen eligible studies were identified. Narrative synthesis resulted in 3 overarching categories reflecting the patient experience: privacy versus loneliness; emotional responses to isolation; quality of care, recovery, and safety in isolation.

CONCLUSIONS

This review synthesizes existing evidence reflecting the patient experience of contact isolation. Study findings were often contradictory and may not reflect contemporary health care, such as shorter hospital stays, or societal preferences for greater privacy. Further research focusing on contemporary health care contexts is recommended.

Nursing staff compliance and adherence to standard precautions during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study

This study investigated the compliance and adherence of nursing staff (nurses, nursing assistants, and midwives) to standard precautions (SPs). A cross-sectional design while adhering to STROBE guidelines was used for this study. Nursing staff from a government tertiary hospital (n = 515) were recruited and completed the Compliance with Standard Precautions Scale (CSPS) and Factors Influencing Adherence to Standard Precautions Scale (FIASPS). Analysis of variance, Pearson's correlation, and linear regression analysis were used to analyze the data. The overall average compliance with the SPs of the nursing staff was suboptimal, and the disposal of sharps domain had the lowest compliance. Nurses were more compliant with sharps disposal, and nursing assistants with waste disposal. Contextual cues were the most influential factor influencing participants' adherence to SPs. All CSPS domains were significantly correlated with the Contextual cues factor of the FIASPS. Finally, service years and educational attainment were significant predictors of SPs adherence. The findings underscore the organization's critical responsibility for actively enforcing policies using monitoring systems and contextual cues in the workplace to ensure staff compliance and adherence with SPs.

Patient safety culture as a space of social struggle: understanding infection prevention practice and patient safety culture within hospital isolation settings - a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

In recent times, infection prevention and patient safety have become a global health policy priority with thought being given to understanding organisational culture within healthcare, and of its significance in initiating sustained quality improvement within infection prevention and patient safety. This paper seeks to explore the ways in which engagement of healthcare workers with infection prevention principles and practices, shape and inform patient safety culture within the context of hospital isolation settings; and vice-versa.

RESEARCH METHODS

In this paper, we utilise focus group interviews at two hospital sites within one health board in order to engage healthcare staff in elaborating on their understandings of infection prevention practices and patient safety culture within isolation settings in their organisation. Focus group transcripts were analysed inductively using thematic analysis in order to identify and develop emerging empirical themes.

RESULTS

Positioned against a background of healthcare restructuring and ever-increasing uncertainty, our study found two very different hospitals in regard to patient safety culture and infection prevention practice. While one hospital site embodies a mixed picture in regard to patient safety culture, the second hospital is best characterised as being highly fragmented. The utilisation of focus group interviews revealed themes that capture the ways in which interviewees position and understand the work they perform within the broader structural, political and cultural context, and what that means for infection prevention practice and patient safety culture.

CONCLUSION

Drawing on the insights of Bourdieu, this paper theorises the field of patient safety as a space of social struggle. Patient safety is thus positioned within its structural, cultural and political context, rather than as merely an epidemiological dilemma.

Evaluation of a new fast in-house Real-Time PCR assay for detecting both Norovirus and toxigenic Clostridium difficile using fecal sample and rectal swab

BACKGROUND

Norovirus and toxigenic Clostridium difficile infections are the 2 most common causes of infectious gastroenteritis. Rapid and reliable detection of these to microorganisms is important to assess if contact precautions are indicated to prevent spreading and reduce cost of isolation.

METHODS

This study determines sensitivity and specificity of a new fast in-house PCR assay used on BD MAX platform to detect both norovirus and C difficile in 1 turn-over in clinical context. Furthermore, fecal samples as well as rectal swabs were used as analysis material to determine the accuracy of the new assay on a fecal samples and rectal swabs compared with standard methods.

RESULTS

From 227 included patients, 143 rectal swabs and 135 fecal samples obtained. The new in-house PCR showed a sensitivity of 73.3% and a specificity of 99.2% for norovirus on a fecal sample and a sensitivity of 57.1% and specificity 99.1% of for norovirus on a rectal swab. For C difficile a sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 100% on a fecal sample and a sensitivity of 90.9% and a specificity of 99.1% on a rectal swab was shown. The time consumption for detecting the 2 enteropathogens was reduced by half by using the new assay.

CONCLUSIONS

The new assay shows an acceptable sensitivity and specificity for C difficile and an acceptable specificity for norovirus when analysis was done on fecal samples and reduces half of the time consumption. Further research is needed to improve the accuracy of the new in-house PCR before clinical implication.

Impact of COVID-19 and other infectious conditions requiring isolation on the provision of and adaptations to fundamental nursing care in hospital in terms of overall patient experience, care quality, functional ability, and treatment outcomes: systematic review

AIM

This systematic review identifies, appraises and synthesizes the evidence on the provision of fundamental nursing care to hospitalized patients with a highly infectious virus and the effectiveness of adaptations to overcome barriers to care.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

In July 2020, we searched Medline, PsycINFO (OvidSP), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), BNI (ProQuest), WHO COVID-19 Database (https://search.bvsalud.org/) MedRxiv (https://www.medrxiv.org/), bioRxiv (https://www.biorxiv.org/) and also Google Scholar, TRIP database and NICE Evidence, forwards citation searching and reference checking of included papers, from 2016 onwards.

REVIEW METHODS

We included quantitative and qualitative research reporting (i) the views, perceptions and experiences of patients who have received fundamental nursing care whilst in hospital with COVID-19, MERS, SARS, H1N1 or EVD or (ii) the views, perceptions and experiences of professional nurses and non-professionally registered care workers who have provided that care. We included review articles, commentaries, protocols and guidance documents. One reviewer performed data extraction and quality appraisal and was checked by another person.

RESULTS

Of 3086 references, we included 64 articles; 19 empirical research and 45 review articles, commentaries, protocols and guidance documents spanning five pandemics. Four main themes (and 11 sub-themes) were identified. Barriers to delivering fundamental care were wearing personal protective equipment, adequate staffing, infection control procedures and emotional challenges of care. These barriers were addressed by multiple adaptations to communication, organization of care, staff support and leadership.

CONCLUSION

To prepare for continuation of the COVID-19 pandemic and future pandemics, evaluative studies of adaptations to fundamental healthcare delivery must be prioritized to enable evidence-based care to be provided in future.

IMPACT

Our review identifies the barriers nurses experience in providing fundamental care during a pandemic, highlights potential adaptations that address barriers and ensure positive healthcare experiences and draws attention to the need for evaluative research on fundamental care practices during pandemics.

Fundamental nursing care in patients with the SARS-CoV-2 virus: results from the 'COVID-NURSE' mixed methods survey into nurses' experiences of missed care and barriers to care

BACKGROUND

Patient experience of nursing care is associated with safety, care quality, treatment outcomes, costs and service use. Effective nursing care includes meeting patients' fundamental physical, relational and psychosocial needs, which may be compromised by the challenges of SARS-CoV-2. No evidence-based nursing guidelines exist for patients with SARS-CoV-2. We report work to develop such a guideline. Our aim was to identify views and experiences of nursing staff on necessary nursing care for inpatients with SARS-CoV-2 (not invasively ventilated) that is omitted or delayed (missed care) and any barriers to this care.

METHODS

We conducted an online mixed methods survey structured according to the Fundamentals of Care Framework. We recruited a convenience sample of UK-based nursing staff who had nursed inpatients with SARS-CoV-2 not invasively ventilated. We asked respondents to rate how well they were able to meet the needs of SARS-CoV-2 patients, compared to non-SARS-CoV-2 patients, in 15 care categories; select from a list of barriers to care; and describe examples of missed care and barriers to care. We analysed quantitative data descriptively and qualitative data using Framework Analysis, integrating data in side-by-side comparison tables.

RESULTS

Of 1062 respondents, the majority rated mobility, talking and listening, non-verbal communication, communicating with significant others, and emotional wellbeing as worse for patients with SARS-CoV-2. Eight barriers were ranked within the top five in at least one of the three care areas. These were (in rank order): wearing Personal Protective Equipment, the severity of patients' conditions, inability to take items in and out of isolation rooms without donning and doffing Personal Protective Equipment, lack of time to spend with patients, lack of presence from specialised services e.g. physiotherapists, lack of knowledge about SARS-CoV-2, insufficient stock, and reluctance to spend time with patients for fear of catching SARS-CoV-2.

CONCLUSIONS

Our respondents identified nursing care areas likely to be missed for patients with SARS-CoV-2, and barriers to delivering care. We are currently evaluating a guideline of nursing strategies to address these barriers, which are unlikely to be exclusive to this pandemic or the environments represented by our respondents. Our results should, therefore, be incorporated into global pandemic planning.

Is it time to reconsider prophylactic antimicrobial use for hematopoietic stem cell transplantation? a narrative review of antimicrobials in stem cell transplantation

INTRODUCTION

Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation (HSCT) is a life-saving procedure for multiple types of hematological cancer, autoimmune diseases, and genetic-linked metabolic diseases in humans. Recipients of HSCT transplant are at high risk of microbial infections that significantly correlate with the presence of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) and the degree of immunosuppression. Infection in HSCT patients is a leading cause of life-threatening complications and mortality.

AREAS COVERED

This review covers issues pertinent to infection in the HSCT patient, including bacterial and viral infection; strategies to reduce GVHD; infection patterns; resistance and treatment options; adverse drug reactions to antimicrobials, problems of antimicrobial resistance; perturbation of the microbiome; the role of prebiotics, probiotics, and antimicrobial peptides. We highlight potential strategies to minimize the use of antimicrobials.

EXPERT OPINION

Measures to control infection and its transmission remain significant HSCT management policy and planning issues. Transplant centers need to consider carefully prophylactic use of antimicrobials for neutropenic patients. The judicious use of appropriate antimicrobials remains a crucial part of the treatment protocol. However, antimicrobials' adverse effects cause microbiome diversity and dysbiosis and have been shown to increase morbidity and mortality.

Evaluation of infection prevention and control preparedness in acute care nurses: Factors influencing adherence to standard precautions

Background

It is essential to identify factors that affect adherence to standard precautions, which could increase risk of occupational exposure to pathogens.

Methods

A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted. Nurses (n = 241) in an acute care hospital completed the survey including the Factors Influencing Adherence to Standard Precautions Scale (FIASPS) (total possible scores in each domain ranged from 5 to 25) and the Compliance with Standard Precautions Scale (CSPS) (total possible scores ranged from 0 to 20).

Results

Results showed moderate influence of the judgement (mean = 14.04, SD = 4.04), leadership (M = 14.58, SD 3.78), and culture/practice (M = 12.61, SD = 3.18) factors; high score on contextual cues (M = 15.77, SD = 3.60); and low score on justification (M = 5.76, SD = 4.57). The overall mean CSPS score was 76.68% (SD 13.82). There was a significant negative relationship between justification for non-use of standard precautions and nurses' adherence with standard precautions (r = −0.24, p < 0.001). A significant positive relationship was reported between the leadership factor (r = 0.25, p < 0.001), cultural practice factor in FIASPS (r = 0.24, p < 0.001) and nurse' adherence with standard precautions.

Conclusion

Nurses would benefit from regular training sessions to reiterate the infection control guidelines and the need to abide to them. Encouraging nurses to be role models serves to increase the adherence to SPs in their colleagues. Organization should continue with strict enforcement of policies with monitoring.

•

Poor adherence to standard precautions increases the risk of exposure to infections.

•

Regular training sessions can improve perception of risks of non-adherence.

•

Nurses can be encouraged to be role models in the practice of standard precautions.

•

Enforcement of policies is crucial to maintain adherence to standard precautions.

COVID-19 and hand hygiene: the vital importance of hand drying

The significance of hand hygiene for preventing the transmission of microorganisms and reducing the spread of infection has been brought into sharp focus following the global coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. In the months since the initial outbreak, international public health campaigns and practitioner education has concentrated on hand washing and hand sanitising, with very little reference to hand drying, if any at all. However, hand drying is integral to effective hand hygiene, and is important in controlling the spread of microorganisms and maintaining healthy skin integrity. This research commentary will focus on two issues of importance with regards to hand drying: microbial transmission and skin irritation, with implications for healthcare practitioners and practice considered. It is argued that a more holistic approach to hand hygiene must be the ambition if health professional and public behaviour is to become embedded and sustained.

Infection prevention control and organisational patient safety culture within the context of isolation: study protocol

BACKGROUND

Healthcare associated infection (HCAI) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. In recent years, there have been high profile successes in infection prevention control (IPC), such as the dramatic reductions in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bloodstream infections (which is viewed as one proxy indicator of overall harm) and Clostridium difficile in the UK. Nevertheless, HCAI remains a costly burden to health services, a source of concern to patients and the public and at present, is receiving priority from policy makers as it contributes to the global threat of antimicrobial resistance.

METHODS

The study involves qualitative case studies within isolation settings at two National Health Service (NHS) district general hospitals (DGHs) in Wales, in the UK. The 18-month study incorporates Manchester Patient Safety Framework (MaPSaF) workshops with health workers and other hospital staff, in depth interviews with patients and their relative / informal carer, health workers and hospital staff, and periods of hospital ward observation.

DISCUSSION

The present study aims to investigate the ways in which engagement of health workers with IPC strategies and principles, shape and inform organisational patient safety culture within the context of isolation in surgical, medical and admission hospital settings; and vice-versa. We want to understand the meaning of IPC 'ownership' for health workers; the ways in which IPC is promoted, how IPC teams operate as new challenges arise, how their effectiveness is assessed and the positioning of IPC within the broader context of organisational patient safety culture, within hospital isolation settings.