ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Healthcare-associated infection compromises patient safety. Compliance with hand hygiene (HH) guidelines has been shown to be an effective method of reducing infection; however, it remains suboptimal and poorer among doctors compared to other healthcare workers. The aim of this study is to determine the relationship between an individualised observational hand hygiene audit (OHHA) and feedback intervention with observed HH compliance. METHODS: We used a retrospective interrupted time series design using OHHA data from a five-year period, 2011-2015. OHHA indicated poorer HH compliance among doctors than other healthcare workers in a 345-bed acute private hospital. An increase in orthopaedic surgical site infection prompted additional auditing of the orthopaedic unit further identifying substandard HH compliance among orthopaedic surgeons. In addition to ongoing HH interventions, an individualised hand hygiene audit and feedback intervention focusing on consultant orthopaedic surgeons was implemented. Observed HH compliance improved. The intervention was then extended to include all consultant doctors at the study site. Audit was implemented by trained clinical nurse managers during clinical rounds. Written audit feedback was provided by the infection prevention and control team. RESULTS: HH compliance increased significantly among both orthopaedic surgeons and other consultant doctors, P < 0.05. CONCLUSION: An individualised audit and feedback intervention was effective in improving compliance. Incorporation of OHHA with individualised feedback into routine daily practice needs to be considered as a quality improvement opportunity. This study has the potential to inform other audit and feedback interventions to maximise effectiveness and ensure implementation.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Compliance with hand hygiene guidelines reduces the risk of health care-associated infection, yet doctors are less compliant than other health care workers. Use of observational hand hygiene auditing with targeted individualized feedback was implemented, with improved hand hygiene of consultant doctors; however, the factors that influenced this were not explained by previous quantitative data. The aim was to explore consultant doctors' opinions about the influence of observational hand hygiene auditing with individualized feedback on hand hygiene behavior. METHODS: Using the Theoretical Domains Framework, we conducted 12 semi-structured in-depth interviews with consultant doctors who experienced the observational hand hygiene audit and feedback intervention. Data were analyzed using a thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: Analysis identified 8 domains of the Theoretical Domains Framework, with 5 dominant domains: (1) behavioral regulation: receiving written individualized audit feedback positively influenced practice; (2) knowledge: provision of specific individualized feedback improved performance; (3) reinforcement: audit highlighted substandard practices; (4) social professional role and identity: audit reports triggered profession-associated competitive motivation; and (5) environmental context and resources: auditing was perceived to be synonymous with strong organizational safety culture. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, provision of individualized targeted feedback was a critical component of observational hand hygiene auditing.
