Measuring hand hygiene compliance rates in different special care settings: a comparative study of methodologies.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to compare methods for assessing compliance with hand hygiene in an intensive care unit (ICU), a step-down unit (SDU), and a hematology-oncology unit. METHODS: Over a 20-week period, we compared hand hygiene compliance measurements by three different methods: direct observation, electronic handwash counter for alcohol gel, and measuring the volume of product used (alcohol gel) in an ICU, an SDU, and a hematology-oncology unit of a tertiary care, private hospital. RESULTS: By direct observation we evaluated 1078 opportunities in the ICU, 1075 in the SDU, and 517 in the hematology-oncology unit, with compliance rates of 70.7%, 75.4%, and 73.3%, respectively. A total of 342,299, 235,914, and 248,698 hand hygiene episodes were recorded by the electronic devices in the ICU, SDU, and hematology-oncology unit, respectively. There were also 127.2 ml, 85.3 ml, and 67.6 ml of alcohol gel used per patient-day in these units. We could find no correlation between the three methods. CONCLUSIONS: Hand hygiene compliance was reasonably high in these units, as measured by direct observation. However, a lack of correlation with results obtained by other methodologies brings into question the validity of direct observation results, and suggests that periodic audits using other methods may be needed.

Comparison of human and electronic observation for the measurement of compliance with hand hygiene.

BACKGROUND: Monitoring of hand hygiene is an important part of the improvement of hospital quality indicators. METHODS: This study was prospectively performed over a 14-week (electronic observer) period from December 3, 2013-March 9, 2014, to evaluate hand hygiene compliance in an adult step-down unit. We compared electronic handwash counters with the application of radiofrequency identification (RFID - ZigBee; i-Healthsys, São Carlos, Brazil) (electronic observer), which counts each activation of the alcohol gel dispenser to direct observation (human observer) using the iScrub application. RESULTS: For the overall time period of simultaneous electronic and human observation, we found that the electronic observer identified 414 hand hygiene episodes, whereas the human observers identified 448 episodes. Therefore, we found 92% (95% confidence interval [CI], 90%-95%) overall concordance (414/448), with an intraclass correlation coefficient of .87 (95% CI, 0.77-0.92). CONCLUSION: Our RFID (ZigBee) system showed good accuracy (92%) and is a useful method to monitor hand hygiene compliance.

The use of real-time feedback via wireless technology to improve hand hygiene compliance.

BACKGROUND: Hand hygiene (HH) is widely regarded as the most effective preventive measure for health care-associated infection. However, there is little robust evidence on the best interventions to improve HH compliance or whether a sustained increase in compliance can reduce rates of health care-associated infection. METHODS: To evaluate the effectiveness of a real-time feedback to improve HH compliance in the inpatient setting, we used a quasiexperimental study comparing the effect of real-time feedback using wireless technology on compliance with HH. The study was conducted in two 20-bed step-down units at a private tertiary care hospital. Phase 1 was a 3-month baseline period in which HH counts were performed by electronic handwash counters. After a 1-month washout period, a 7-month intervention was performed in one step-down unit while the other unit served as a control. RESULTS: HH, as measured by dispensing episodes, was significantly higher in the intervention unit (90.1 vs 73.1 dispensing episodes/patient-day, respectively, P = .001). When the intervention unit was compared with itself before and after implementation of the wireless technology, there was also a significant increase in HH after implementation (74.5 vs 90.1 episodes/patient-day, respectively, P = .01). There was also an increase in mean alcohol-based handrub consumption between the 2 phases (68.9 vs 103.1 mL/patient-day, respectively, P = .04) in the intervention unit. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated an improvement in alcohol gel usage via implementation of real-time feedback via wireless technology.