改善医院的手部卫生:比较轻推和加强对协议遵守的影响

IF 5.1 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED Behavioural Public Policy Pub Date : 2021-05-03 DOI:10.1017/bpp.2021.15
Henrico van Roekel, Joanne Reinhard, S. Grimmelikhuijsen
{"title":"改善医院的手部卫生:比较轻推和加强对协议遵守的影响","authors":"Henrico van Roekel, Joanne Reinhard, S. Grimmelikhuijsen","doi":"10.1017/bpp.2021.15","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Nudging has become a well-known policy practice. Recently, ‘boosting’ has been suggested as an alternative to nudging. In contrast to nudges, boosts aim to empower individuals to exert their own agency to make decisions. This article is one of the first to compare a nudging and a boosting intervention, and it does so in a critical field setting: hand hygiene compliance of hospital nurses. During a 4-week quasi-experiment, we tested the effect of a reframing nudge and a risk literacy boost on hand hygiene compliance in three hospital wards. The results show that nudging and boosting were both effective interventions to improve hand hygiene compliance. A tentative finding is that, while the nudge had a stronger immediate effect, the boost effect remained stable for a week, even after the removal of the intervention. We conclude that, besides nudging, researchers and policymakers may consider boosting when they seek to implement or test behavioral interventions in domains such as healthcare.","PeriodicalId":29777,"journal":{"name":"Behavioural Public Policy","volume":"6 1","pages":"52 - 74"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/bpp.2021.15","citationCount":"16","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Improving hand hygiene in hospitals: comparing the effect of a nudge and a boost on protocol compliance\",\"authors\":\"Henrico van Roekel, Joanne Reinhard, S. Grimmelikhuijsen\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/bpp.2021.15\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Nudging has become a well-known policy practice. Recently, ‘boosting’ has been suggested as an alternative to nudging. In contrast to nudges, boosts aim to empower individuals to exert their own agency to make decisions. This article is one of the first to compare a nudging and a boosting intervention, and it does so in a critical field setting: hand hygiene compliance of hospital nurses. During a 4-week quasi-experiment, we tested the effect of a reframing nudge and a risk literacy boost on hand hygiene compliance in three hospital wards. The results show that nudging and boosting were both effective interventions to improve hand hygiene compliance. A tentative finding is that, while the nudge had a stronger immediate effect, the boost effect remained stable for a week, even after the removal of the intervention. We conclude that, besides nudging, researchers and policymakers may consider boosting when they seek to implement or test behavioral interventions in domains such as healthcare.\",\"PeriodicalId\":29777,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Behavioural Public Policy\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"52 - 74\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-05-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/bpp.2021.15\",\"citationCount\":\"16\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Behavioural Public Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2021.15\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavioural Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2021.15","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16

摘要

Nudging已经成为一种众所周知的政策实践。最近,“助推”被建议作为轻推的替代方案。与轻推相比,助推旨在赋予个人权力,使其能够发挥自己的决策能力。这篇文章是第一篇比较轻推和加强干预的文章之一,它是在一个关键的领域环境中进行的:医院护士的手卫生依从性。在一项为期4周的准实验中,我们在三个医院病房测试了重新构建轻推和提高风险素养对手部卫生依从性的影响。结果表明,轻推和加强都是提高手部卫生依从性的有效干预措施。一个初步的发现是,虽然这种推动具有更强的即时效果,但即使在取消干预后,这种促进效果也在一周内保持稳定。我们的结论是,除了推动之外,研究人员和政策制定者在寻求实施或测试医疗保健等领域的行为干预措施时,可能会考虑推动。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Improving hand hygiene in hospitals: comparing the effect of a nudge and a boost on protocol compliance
Abstract Nudging has become a well-known policy practice. Recently, ‘boosting’ has been suggested as an alternative to nudging. In contrast to nudges, boosts aim to empower individuals to exert their own agency to make decisions. This article is one of the first to compare a nudging and a boosting intervention, and it does so in a critical field setting: hand hygiene compliance of hospital nurses. During a 4-week quasi-experiment, we tested the effect of a reframing nudge and a risk literacy boost on hand hygiene compliance in three hospital wards. The results show that nudging and boosting were both effective interventions to improve hand hygiene compliance. A tentative finding is that, while the nudge had a stronger immediate effect, the boost effect remained stable for a week, even after the removal of the intervention. We conclude that, besides nudging, researchers and policymakers may consider boosting when they seek to implement or test behavioral interventions in domains such as healthcare.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.90
自引率
2.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The effect of timers and precommitments on handwashing: a randomised controlled trial in a kitchen laboratory Beliefs, observability and donation revision in charitable giving: evidence from an online experiment The paradox of disclosure: shifting policies from revealing to resolving conflicts of interest Harnessing heterogeneity in behavioural research using computational social science Deception aversion, communal norm violation and consumer responses to prosocial initiatives
×
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