Implementing an electronic hand hygiene system improved compliance in the intensive care unit.

BACKGROUND: Hand hygiene (HH) compliance is low and difficult to improve among health care workers. We aim to validate an electronic HH system and assess the impact of this system on HH compliance and quality changes over time at both group and individual levels. METHODS: An automated electronic HH system was installed in a 10-bed surgical intensive care unit. RESULTS: The full HH compliance rate increased significantly from 8.4% in week 1 to 20.5% in week 16 with week 10 being the highest (27.4%). The partial compliance rate maintained relative consistency between 13.2% and 20.0%. The combined compliance rate (full compliance rate + partial compliance rate) increased from 23.5% in week 1 to 34.6% in week 16 with week 10 being the highest (41.4%). DISCUSSION: We found significant variations among providers in terms of HH opportunities per shift, full compliance, partial compliance and combined compliance rates. The average duration of hand rubbing over time in partial compliance occurrences did not change significantly over time. CONCLUSIONS: A sensor-based platform with automated HH compliance and quality monitoring, real time feedback and comprehensive individual level analysis, improved providers' HH compliance in an intensive care unit. There were significant variations among individual providers.

Clinical trial of chlorinated polyethylene for facial prosthetics.

PURPOSE: Extraoral maxillofacial prostheses have been fabricated with silicone elastomer for 50 years with few improvements. The objective of this controlled, randomized, prospective, double-blind, single-crossover, multicenter, phase III clinical trial was to determine the noninferiority of chlorinated polyethylene elastomer (CPE) to silicone elastomer for fabricating prostheses. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-two patients were randomly assigned to wear a custom-made prosthesis fabricated from both materials for 4 months and asked to rate their satisfaction (0 = not satisfied, 10 = completely satisfied). Many other measures of prosthesis performance were investigated (see online appendices). RESULTS: Of the 28 patients who completed the study, 68% had used silicone prostheses previously. Overall, patients rated the silicone prosthesis higher than CPE (difference: 2.2, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.9 to 3.6, P = .017). Previous users had a stronger preference for silicone (difference: 3.3, 95% CI: 1.7 to 4.9, P = .001), while the 9 new users rated the two materials similarly (difference: 0.0, 95% CI: -2.1 to 2.1, P = 1.00). CONCLUSIONS: The noninferiority of CPE could not be established because of the early termination of the trial. Previous users of silicone prostheses preferred those made of silicone. However, new users expressed no preference between prostheses fabricated with the low-cost CPE or silicone. The authors have developed original clinical trial methodology for assessing extraoral maxillofacial prostheses.