Methods: This study, stratified in pre-, during, and post-intervention periods, was conducted between February 2017 and March 2018 in two wards at a tertiary care hospital in Malaysia. Hand hygiene promotion was facilitated either by PICAs (study arm 1) or MSCAs (study arm 2), and the two wards were randomly allocated to one of the two interventions. Outcomes were: 1) perceived leadership styles of PICAs and MSCAs by staff, vocalised during question and answer sessions; 2) the social network connectedness and communication patterns between HCWs and change agents by applying social network analysis; and 3) hand hygiene leadership attributes obtained from HCWs in the post-intervention period by questionnaires.
Results: Hand hygiene compliance in study arm 1 and study arm 2 improved by from 48% (95% CI: 44-53%) to 66% (63-69%), and from 50% (44-55%) to 65% (60-69%), respectively. There was no significant difference between the two arms. Healthcare workers perceived that PICAs lead by example, while MSCAs applied an authoritarian top-down leadership style. The organisational culture of both wards was hierarchical, with little social interaction, but strong team cohesion. Position and networks of both PICAs and MSCAs were similar and generally weaker compared to the leaders who were nominated by HCWs in the post-intervention period. Healthcare workers on both wards perceived authoritative leadership to be the most desirable attribute for hand hygiene improvement.
Conclusion: Despite experiencing successful hand hygiene improvement from PICAs, HCWs expressed a preference for the existing top-down leadership structure. This highlights the limits of applying leadership models that are not supported by the local organisational culture.
METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional, online-based survey study between January 28, 2020, and February 2, 2020 among the adult lay public in Wuhan to access their support, understanding of, compliance with, and the psychological impacts of the quarantine. Multivariable logistic analysis was used to identify factors associated with psychological impacts.
RESULTS: Among the 4100 participants investigated, a total of 15.9% were compliant with all the five household prevention measures, whereas 74.4% were compliant with all the three community prevention measures investigated. By demographics, participants of younger age, higher income, residing in an urban area, knowing neighbors infected with COVID-19 reported significantly higher psychological impact score. Participants with a lower level of support for quarantine were more likely to have a higher psychological impact score (OR = 1.45, 95% CI 1.07-1.96). Participants with a lower level of compliance with preventive measures (score of 0-19) reported higher psychological impact (OR = 1.40, 95% CI 1.22-1.60 vs. score 20-24). Participants who had been out of house socializing and attended public events expressed higher psychological impact.
CONCLUSIONS: Support, understanding of the rationale for quarantine are essential in ensuring appropriate psychological well-being during the quarantine. Improvements in compliance with preventive measures are highly warranted and may bring about a reduction in psychological distress.
Methods: A survey study was performed in seven Asian countries. An email invitation with a link to the survey was sent to participants who were asked to complete the questionnaire consisting of eight clinical scenarios.
Results: Of the 137 doctors invited, 123 (89.8%) provided valid responses. Approximately 50% of the participants adhered to the guidelines regardless of the risk of adenoma, except in the case of tubulovillous adenoma ≥10 mm combined with high-grade dysplasia, in which 35% of the participants adhered to the guidelines. The participants were stratified according to the number of colonoscopies performed: ≥20 colonoscopies per month (high volume group) and <20 colonoscopies per month (low volume group). Higher adherence to the postpolypectomy surveillance guidelines was evident in the high volume group (60%) than in the low volume group (25%). The reasons for nonadherence included concern of missed polyps (59%), the low cost of colonoscopy (26%), concern of incomplete resection (25%), and concern of medical liability (15%).
Conclusions: A discrepancy between clinical practice and surveillance guidelines among physicians in Asia was found. Physicians in the low volume group frequently did not adhere to the guidelines, suggesting a need for continuing education and appropriate control. Concerns regarding the quality of colonoscopy and complete polypectomy were the main reasons for nonadherence.
METHODS: This cross-sectional study aimed to determine factors associated with self-reported HH performance among nurses at Kelantan tertiary care hospitals. A sample of 438 registered nurses was selected through a stratified random sampling method. Self-reported HH performance was assessed using a validated WHO self-administered HH knowledge and perception questionnaire for healthcare workers.
RESULTS: A multiple linear regression analysis was performed to identify the predictors. The factors that significantly predicted self-reported HH performance among nurses included perception score (beta coefficient (β) = 0.260; 95% CI: 0.200, 0.417; p < 0.001), pediatric department (β = -0.104; 95% CI: -9.335, -2.467; p < 0.001), and orthopedic department (β = -5.957; 95% CI: -9.539, -0.720; p < 0.023), adjusted R2 = 0.102; p < 0.001. Nurses with a strong perception and belief in HH were more likely to have better HH performance. Compared to pediatric and orthopedic, surgical departments were associated with better self-reported HH performance.
CONCLUSIONS: This study showed the importance of factors that could improve the intervention's performance in HH strategy. Lack of perception and HH program intervention in departments engaged in patient care could lead to poor HH practices, thus increasing HCAIs and antimicrobial resistance (AMR).