Hand hygiene in emergencies: Multiprofessional perceptions from a mixed methods based online survey in Germany

IF 3.1 Q1 NURSING
Stefan Bushuven , Michael Bentele , Stefanie Bentele , Milena Trifunovic-Koenig , Sven Lederle , Bianka Gerber , Joachim Bansbach , Julian Friebel , Julian Ganter , Irit Nachtigall , Simone Scheithauer
{"title":"Hand hygiene in emergencies: Multiprofessional perceptions from a mixed methods based online survey in Germany","authors":"Stefan Bushuven ,&nbsp;Michael Bentele ,&nbsp;Stefanie Bentele ,&nbsp;Milena Trifunovic-Koenig ,&nbsp;Sven Lederle ,&nbsp;Bianka Gerber ,&nbsp;Joachim Bansbach ,&nbsp;Julian Friebel ,&nbsp;Julian Ganter ,&nbsp;Irit Nachtigall ,&nbsp;Simone Scheithauer","doi":"10.1016/j.ijnsa.2024.100207","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Despite high vulnerability to infection, hand disinfection compliance in emergencies is low. This is regularly justified as the disinfection procedure delays life support, and instead, wearing disposable gloves is preferred. Simulation studies showed higher achievable compliance than detected in real-life situations. This study aimed to explore healthcare providers’ attitudes toward hand disinfection and using gloves in emergencies.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We conducted an anonymous online survey in Germany on the attitude and subjective behavior in the five moments of hand hygiene in a closed environment and an open convenience sampling survey. Statistics included paired student's <em>t</em>-tests corrected for multiple testing. For qualitative analysis, we employed a single-coder approach.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>In 400 participants, we detected low priority of WHO-1 (before touching a patient) and WHO-2 (before clean/aseptic procedure) hand hygiene moments, despite knowing the risks of omission of hand disinfection. For all moments, self-assessment exceeded the assessment of colleagues (<em>p</em> &lt; 0.001). For WHO-3, we detected a lower disinfection priority for wearing gloves compared to contaminated bare hands. Qualitative analyses revealed five themes: basic conditions, didactic implementations, cognitive load, and uncertainty about feasibility and efficacy.</p></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><p>Considering bias, the study's subjective nature, the unknown role of emergency-related infections contributing to hospital-acquired infections, and different experiences of healthcare providers, we conclude that hand disinfection before emergencies is de-prioritized and justified by the emergency situation regardless of the objective feasibility.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>This study reveals subjective and objective barriers to implementation of WHO-1 and WHO-2 moments of hand disinfection to be further evaluated and addressed in educational programs.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":34476,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Nursing Studies Advances","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666142X24000341/pdfft?md5=f9c830465c96c726fb4e92a029d5899e&pid=1-s2.0-S2666142X24000341-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Nursing Studies Advances","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666142X24000341","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Despite high vulnerability to infection, hand disinfection compliance in emergencies is low. This is regularly justified as the disinfection procedure delays life support, and instead, wearing disposable gloves is preferred. Simulation studies showed higher achievable compliance than detected in real-life situations. This study aimed to explore healthcare providers’ attitudes toward hand disinfection and using gloves in emergencies.

Methods

We conducted an anonymous online survey in Germany on the attitude and subjective behavior in the five moments of hand hygiene in a closed environment and an open convenience sampling survey. Statistics included paired student's t-tests corrected for multiple testing. For qualitative analysis, we employed a single-coder approach.

Results

In 400 participants, we detected low priority of WHO-1 (before touching a patient) and WHO-2 (before clean/aseptic procedure) hand hygiene moments, despite knowing the risks of omission of hand disinfection. For all moments, self-assessment exceeded the assessment of colleagues (p < 0.001). For WHO-3, we detected a lower disinfection priority for wearing gloves compared to contaminated bare hands. Qualitative analyses revealed five themes: basic conditions, didactic implementations, cognitive load, and uncertainty about feasibility and efficacy.

Discussion

Considering bias, the study's subjective nature, the unknown role of emergency-related infections contributing to hospital-acquired infections, and different experiences of healthcare providers, we conclude that hand disinfection before emergencies is de-prioritized and justified by the emergency situation regardless of the objective feasibility.

Conclusion

This study reveals subjective and objective barriers to implementation of WHO-1 and WHO-2 moments of hand disinfection to be further evaluated and addressed in educational programs.

紧急情况下的手部卫生:基于混合方法的德国在线调查得出的多专业人员的看法
导言尽管很容易受到感染,但紧急情况下的手部消毒依从性却很低。这通常是有道理的,因为消毒程序会耽误生命支持,而戴一次性手套则更受欢迎。模拟研究表明,与真实情况相比,手部消毒的依从性更高。本研究旨在探讨医护人员对手部消毒和在紧急情况下使用手套的态度。方法我们在德国进行了一项匿名在线调查,内容涉及在封闭环境中手部卫生的五个时刻的态度和主观行为,以及一项开放式便利抽样调查。统计数据包括经多重检验校正的配对学生 t 检验。结果 在 400 名参与者中,我们发现,尽管知道忽略手部消毒的风险,但 WHO-1(接触病人前)和 WHO-2(清洁/无菌操作前)手部卫生时刻的优先级较低。在所有时刻,自我评估都超过了同事评估(p < 0.001)。对于 WHO-3,我们发现戴手套的消毒优先级低于受污染的裸手。定性分析揭示了五个主题:基本条件、说教式实施、认知负荷以及可行性和有效性的不确定性。讨论考虑到偏见、研究的主观性、急诊相关感染在医院获得性感染中所起作用的未知性以及医护人员的不同经验,我们得出结论:无论客观可行性如何,急诊前的手部消毒都会因急诊情况而被降低优先级并被认为是合理的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
45
审稿时长
81 days
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信