Hand hygiene compliance: universally better post-contact than pre-contact in healthcare workers in the UK and Australia

A. Bahal, Karamchandani, A. Fraise, M. McLaws
{"title":"Hand hygiene compliance: universally better post-contact than pre-contact in healthcare workers in the UK and Australia","authors":"A. Bahal, Karamchandani, A. Fraise, M. McLaws","doi":"10.1177/14690446070080011001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To establish whether post-patient contact hand hygiene practice is universally higher than pre-patient contact in two highly resourced countries. Methods: Observations of medical and nursing staffs' hand hygiene compliance were made by the same observers in two different hospitals in Sydney and Birmingham, in both intensive care units (ICU) and surgical wards, using a standardised data collection tool. Results: Hand hygiene rates pre- and post-patient contact were low for both nurses and doctors in Sydney and Birmingham, with the exception of Sydney ICU doctors (pre-contact 74.8% and post-contact 75.7%, p=0.868). Post-contact compliance was low but significantly better than pre-contact in Sydney ICU nurses (41.3% versus 59.6% p<0.0001), surgical ward nurses (14.9% versus 29.6%, p=0.0019) and Sydney surgeons (10.2% versus 30.2%, p<0.0001). Post-contact compliance rates were low but higher than pre-contact in Birmingham ICU nurses (33.1% versus 52.2%, p=0.0011) and doctors (29.3% versus 70.1%, p<0.0001) but not in the Birmingham surgical ward (nurses: 42.6% versus 43.4%, p=0.89; surgeons: 39.6% versus 48.4%, p=0.187). Handwashing on removal of gloves was extremely low (1.7% to 16.6%), regardless of city, specialties or clinical staff. Conclusion: The pattern of post-contact compliance and non-compliance associated with glove use strongly suggests hand hygiene practice in both countries is primarily self-protective rather than a patient safety centred practice.","PeriodicalId":265443,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Infection Control","volume":"21 11","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"15","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Infection Control","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14690446070080011001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

Abstract

Objective: To establish whether post-patient contact hand hygiene practice is universally higher than pre-patient contact in two highly resourced countries. Methods: Observations of medical and nursing staffs' hand hygiene compliance were made by the same observers in two different hospitals in Sydney and Birmingham, in both intensive care units (ICU) and surgical wards, using a standardised data collection tool. Results: Hand hygiene rates pre- and post-patient contact were low for both nurses and doctors in Sydney and Birmingham, with the exception of Sydney ICU doctors (pre-contact 74.8% and post-contact 75.7%, p=0.868). Post-contact compliance was low but significantly better than pre-contact in Sydney ICU nurses (41.3% versus 59.6% p<0.0001), surgical ward nurses (14.9% versus 29.6%, p=0.0019) and Sydney surgeons (10.2% versus 30.2%, p<0.0001). Post-contact compliance rates were low but higher than pre-contact in Birmingham ICU nurses (33.1% versus 52.2%, p=0.0011) and doctors (29.3% versus 70.1%, p<0.0001) but not in the Birmingham surgical ward (nurses: 42.6% versus 43.4%, p=0.89; surgeons: 39.6% versus 48.4%, p=0.187). Handwashing on removal of gloves was extremely low (1.7% to 16.6%), regardless of city, specialties or clinical staff. Conclusion: The pattern of post-contact compliance and non-compliance associated with glove use strongly suggests hand hygiene practice in both countries is primarily self-protective rather than a patient safety centred practice.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
手部卫生依从性:在英国和澳大利亚,卫生保健工作者普遍在接触后比接触前更好
目的:了解在两个资源丰富的国家,患者接触后的手卫生习惯是否普遍高于患者接触前。方法:采用标准化数据收集工具,对悉尼和伯明翰两家不同医院重症监护病房(ICU)和外科病房医护人员的手卫生依从性进行观察。结果:除悉尼ICU医生外,悉尼和伯明翰地区护士和医生患者接触前和接触后的手卫生率均较低(接触前74.8%和接触后75.7%,p=0.868)。悉尼ICU护士(41.3%比59.6% p<0.0001)、外科病房护士(14.9%比29.6%,p=0.0019)和悉尼外科医生(10.2%比30.2%,p<0.0001)接触后依从性较低,但明显优于接触前依从性。伯明翰ICU护士(33.1%对52.2%,p=0.0011)和医生(29.3%对70.1%,p<0.0001)接触后依从率较低,但高于接触前依从率,而伯明翰外科病房的依从率较低(护士:42.6%对43.4%,p=0.89;外科医生:39.6%对48.4%,p=0.187)。无论城市、专业或临床工作人员,脱手套后的洗手率极低(1.7%至16.6%)。结论:与手套使用相关的接触后依从性和不依从性模式强烈表明,这两个国家的手卫生做法主要是自我保护,而不是以患者安全为中心的做法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Integrated care pathway for Clostridium difficile helps patient management The First European Union Antibiotic Awareness Day: raising awareness to protect the future Single room isolation to prevent the transmission of infection: development of a patient journey tool to support safe practice Essential Steps to Safe, Clean Care: The process of managing change Determinants of appropriate antibiotic use in the community — a survey in Sydney and Hong Kong
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1