METHODS: A total of 377 school children, male and female, aged 5-6 years old, participated and were assigned to either the intervention or a control group. During the 2 months intervention period, children in the test group were trained on proper hand hygiene practices and techniques with the aid of the interactive android-based tablets. The numbers of absent days of all the children were recorded for 2 months before the intervention and during the intervention.
RESULTS: In the test group, there was a 25% increase in the total number of absent days from the pre-intervention period to the intervention period, a much lesser increment observed as compared to that of control group in which the increase was much higher at 89%. Results showed a significant difference (P hand hygiene compliance, which may help decrease school absenteeism due to illness; however, a longer study duration may be necessary to evaluate the benefit further.
METHOD: A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted among the general population of Pakistan to investigate the knowledge and perception about hand hygiene, self-reported hand hygiene practices, adherence to hand hygienic guidelines, and barriers to optimal hand hygiene. Kruskal-Wallis test, Mann-Whitney U test, and Regression model were used for statistical analysis.
RESULTS: There was a significant difference in area-based knowledge (P = 0.026), beliefs (P = 0.027), and practices (P = 0.002) regarding hand hygiene. The results of regression analysis revealed that people in urban areas were more likely to have better knowledge (β = 0.108, CI = 0.076 - 0.05, P = 0.008) and better adherence (β = 0.115, CI = 0.514 - 2.68, P = 0.004) to hand hygienic practices.
CONCLUSION: Advertisements on television and other electronic media with appealing slogans could be effective in making people more compliant to optimal hand hygienic practices.
METHOD: A pre-school was provided with an interactive hand hygiene application for two months. The device features an online administrator dashboard for data collection and for monitoring the children's hand washing steps and duration. A good hand washing is defined as hand washing which comprise all of the steps outlined in the World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines.
RESULTS: The prototype managed to capture 6882 hand wash performed with an average of 20.85 seconds per hand wash. Washing hands palm to palm was the most frequent (79.9%) step performed, whereas scrubbing fingernails and wrists were the least (56%) steps performed.
CONCLUSIONS: The device is a good prototype to educate, stimulate and monitor good hand hygiene practices. However, other measures should be undertaken to ensure sustainability of the practices.
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).
METHODS: A concurrent mixed-method approach was used. In the quantitative strand, a cross-sectional online survey was carried out via a Google form. Mann-Whitney U test and Chi-squared test were used for comparisons. In the qualitative strand, twelve participants were interviewed, based on a semi-structured interview guide and audio recorded. Transcribed data were evaluated with thematic content analysis.
RESULTS: A total of 225 final-year medical students were studied in the quantitative strand. Most were females. The mean score for knowledge was 3.35 ± 0.795 out of six. Of them, 31.6 % of participants scored below 3 points ( 80 %). Only 36.4 % reported "adequate" hand hygiene performance in all eight dimensions of the behavior domain. Noticeably, fewer participants reported to clean their hands after checking blood pressure (55.6 %), and only 66.2 % stated carrying a hand sanitizer in their pocket. Significant correlations were not found between reported behavior and attitudes (p = 0.821) or knowledge (p = 0.794). The qualitative strand with 12 respondents revealed the positive influence of both hierarchical and non-hierarchal role models. Time constraints, skin irritation, and workload pressures were the main barriers. Frequent reminders, supervision, and interactive teaching were suggested as methods to improve hand hygiene compliance. They also stated that increased enthusiasm was noted on hand hygiene during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to the pre-pandemic period.
CONCLUSIONS: Most of the participants had positive attitudes towards hand hygiene. Yet, a considerable gap between attitudes and knowledge and reported hand hygiene behavior was evident. Coupling educational programs that use cognitive and behavioral methods, including role modeling, supervision, and frequent reminders, is recommended to bridge the knowledge-attitude-behavior gap.
DESIGN: Randomized-controlled study.
SETTING: Two internal medicine wards of a public, university-affiliated, tertiary-care hospital in Malaysia.
METHODS: We randomly allocated 2 wards to hand hygiene promotion delivered either by PICAs (study arm 1) or by MSCAs (study arm 2). The primary outcome was hand hygiene compliance using direct observation by validated auditors. Secondary outcomes were hand hygiene knowledge and observations from ward tours.
RESULTS: Mean hand hygiene compliance in study arm 1 and study arm 2 improved from 48% (95% confidence interval [CI], 44%-53%) and 50% (95% CI, 44%-55%) in the preintervention period to 66% (63%-69%) and 65% (60%-69%) in the intervention period, respectively. We detected no statistically significant difference in hand hygiene improvement between the 2 study arms. Knowledge scores on hand hygiene in study arm 1 and study arm 2 improved from 60% and 63% to 98% and 93%, respectively. Staff in study arm 1 improved hand hygiene because they did not want to disappoint the efforts taken by the PICAs. Staff in study arm 2 felt pressured by the MSCAs to comply with hand hygiene to obtain good overall performance appraisals.
CONCLUSION: Although the attitude of PICAs and MSCAs in terms of leadership, mode of action and perception of their task by staff were very different, or even opposed, both PICAs and MSCAs effectively changed behavior of staff toward improved hand hygiene to comparable levels.
Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted from March to July 2019 on 126 students and 37 laboratory staff/clinical instructors' MPs from the Faculty of Health Sciences, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia by a simple random sampling technique. Along with the questionnaire, a swab sample from each participant's MPs was collected and transported to the microbiology laboratory for bacterial culture as per standard microbiological procedures and antimicrobial susceptibility test by the disc diffusion technique. Data were analysed by the Statistical Package for Social Sciences Programme version 24.
Results: All of the tested MPs were contaminated with either single or mix bacterial agents. Bacillus spp. (74.8%), coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS; 47.9%) and S. aureus (20.9%) were the most predominant bacterial isolates, whilst the least isolate was Proteus vulgaris (P. vulgaris) (2.5%). Oxacillin resistance was seen in 5.9% of S. aureus isolate. A comparison of bacteria type and frequency among gender showed a significant difference with P. vulgaris (P = 0.003) and among profession showed a significant difference with S. aureus (P = 0.004).
Conclusion: The present study indicates that MPs can serve as a vector for both pathogenic and non-pathogenic organisms. Therefore, full guidelines about restricting the use of MPs in laboratory environments, hand hygiene and frequent decontamination of MPs are recommended to limit the risk of cross-contamination and healthcare-associated infections caused by MPs.
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.