Interventions to improve hand hygiene in community settings: a systematic review of theories, barriers and enablers, behaviour change techniques and hand hygiene station design features.

IF 6.1 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Sridevi K Prasad, Jedidiah S Snyder, Erin LaFon, Lilly A O'Brien, Hannah K Rogers, Oliver Cumming, Joanna Esteves Mills, Bruce Gordon, Marlene K Wolfe, Matthew C Freeman, Bethany A Caruso
{"title":"Interventions to improve hand hygiene in community settings: a systematic review of theories, barriers and enablers, behaviour change techniques and hand hygiene station design features.","authors":"Sridevi K Prasad, Jedidiah S Snyder, Erin LaFon, Lilly A O'Brien, Hannah K Rogers, Oliver Cumming, Joanna Esteves Mills, Bruce Gordon, Marlene K Wolfe, Matthew C Freeman, Bethany A Caruso","doi":"10.1136/bmjgh-2025-018928","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>This systematic review identified and examined the theories, barriers and enablers, behaviour change techniques (BCTs), and design features of interventions that have been leveraged to improve and sustain hand hygiene in community settings. It was conducted to support the development of the WHO Guidelines for Hand Hygiene in Community Settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, CINAHL, Global Health, Cochrane Library, Global Index Medicus, Scopus, PAIS Index, WHO IRIS, UN Digital Library and World Bank eLibrary for studies published through 29 March 2023, and consulted experts. Eligible studies had an intervention targeting hand hygiene behaviour, quantitatively measured hand hygiene practice, were published in English after 1 January 1980 and were set in non-healthcare community settings. Studies in healthcare settings, nursing homes or long-term care facilities were excluded. Two reviewers independently extracted data from each study and appraised study quality (Mixed Method Appraisal Tool).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>223 eligible studies (including 247 398 participants) met inclusion criteria, 82% of which were reported to be effective at improving hand hygiene. A minority (28%) used theory to inform intervention design. Interventions did not always address identified barriers or enablers. Most interventions addressed 'action knowledge' (eg, handwashing instruction), which was not a widely reported barrier or enabler. Interventions did not extensively address the physical environment (eg, resource availability) despite its importance for hand hygiene. Interventions leveraged a variety of BCT combinations, limiting comparability. We did not conduct a meta-analysis on effectiveness due to heterogeneity across studies. 10 studies evaluated hand hygiene station design adaptation, six examined variations in frequency or intensity of intervention delivery, and four focused on people with disabilities, revealing gaps in evidence.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Findings are limited by inconsistent intervention reporting but more consistent identification and leveraging of barriers and enablers would improve alignment of hand hygiene interventions to local context.</p><p><strong>Prospero registration number: </strong>CRD42023429145.</p>","PeriodicalId":9137,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Global Health","volume":"10 Suppl 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12443188/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Global Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2025-018928","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: This systematic review identified and examined the theories, barriers and enablers, behaviour change techniques (BCTs), and design features of interventions that have been leveraged to improve and sustain hand hygiene in community settings. It was conducted to support the development of the WHO Guidelines for Hand Hygiene in Community Settings.

Methods: We searched PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, CINAHL, Global Health, Cochrane Library, Global Index Medicus, Scopus, PAIS Index, WHO IRIS, UN Digital Library and World Bank eLibrary for studies published through 29 March 2023, and consulted experts. Eligible studies had an intervention targeting hand hygiene behaviour, quantitatively measured hand hygiene practice, were published in English after 1 January 1980 and were set in non-healthcare community settings. Studies in healthcare settings, nursing homes or long-term care facilities were excluded. Two reviewers independently extracted data from each study and appraised study quality (Mixed Method Appraisal Tool).

Results: 223 eligible studies (including 247 398 participants) met inclusion criteria, 82% of which were reported to be effective at improving hand hygiene. A minority (28%) used theory to inform intervention design. Interventions did not always address identified barriers or enablers. Most interventions addressed 'action knowledge' (eg, handwashing instruction), which was not a widely reported barrier or enabler. Interventions did not extensively address the physical environment (eg, resource availability) despite its importance for hand hygiene. Interventions leveraged a variety of BCT combinations, limiting comparability. We did not conduct a meta-analysis on effectiveness due to heterogeneity across studies. 10 studies evaluated hand hygiene station design adaptation, six examined variations in frequency or intensity of intervention delivery, and four focused on people with disabilities, revealing gaps in evidence.

Conclusions: Findings are limited by inconsistent intervention reporting but more consistent identification and leveraging of barriers and enablers would improve alignment of hand hygiene interventions to local context.

Prospero registration number: CRD42023429145.

Abstract Image

改善社区环境中手卫生的干预措施:对理论、障碍和促进因素、行为改变技术和手卫生站设计特点的系统回顾。
本系统综述确定并检查了用于改善和维持社区手部卫生的干预措施的理论、障碍和推动因素、行为改变技术(bct)和设计特征。开展这项调查是为了支持世卫组织《社区环境中手部卫生指南》的制定。方法:我们检索PubMed、Web of Science、EMBASE、CINAHL、Global Health、Cochrane Library、Global Index Medicus、Scopus、PAIS Index、WHO IRIS、UN Digital Library和World Bank Library,检索截至2023年3月29日发表的研究,并咨询专家。在1980年1月1日之后用英文发表了针对手卫生行为的干预研究,定量测量了手卫生实践,并设置在非医疗保健社区环境中。排除了医疗机构、养老院或长期护理机构的研究。两名审稿人独立地从每个研究中提取数据并评估研究质量(混合方法评估工具)。结果:223项符合条件的研究(包括24398名受试者)符合纳入标准,其中82%的研究报告对改善手卫生有效。少数人(28%)使用理论来指导干预设计。干预措施并不总是针对已确定的障碍或促成因素。大多数干预措施涉及“行动知识”(例如洗手指导),这并不是广泛报道的障碍或促成因素。干预措施没有广泛解决物理环境(例如,资源可用性),尽管它对手部卫生很重要。干预措施利用了多种BCT组合,限制了可比性。由于研究的异质性,我们没有对有效性进行荟萃分析。10项研究评估了手卫生站设计的适应性,6项研究检查了干预提供频率或强度的变化,4项研究关注残疾人,揭示了证据的空白。结论:研究结果受到不一致的干预报告的限制,但更一致的识别和利用障碍和促成因素将改善手卫生干预措施与当地情况的一致性。普洛斯彼罗注册号:CRD42023429145。
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
BMJ Global Health
BMJ Global Health Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
11.40
自引率
4.90%
发文量
429
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊介绍: BMJ Global Health is an online Open Access journal from BMJ that focuses on publishing high-quality peer-reviewed content pertinent to individuals engaged in global health, including policy makers, funders, researchers, clinicians, and frontline healthcare workers. The journal encompasses all facets of global health, with a special emphasis on submissions addressing underfunded areas such as non-communicable diseases (NCDs). It welcomes research across all study phases and designs, from study protocols to phase I trials to meta-analyses, including small or specialized studies. The journal also encourages opinionated discussions on controversial topics.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信