Long-term effectiveness evaluation of an action-research intervention to improve hand hygiene in an intensive care unit

To evaluate the long-term effectiveness of an action research intervention aimed at improving hand hygiene in an intensive care unit of a public hospital in Italy. An observational, prospective before-after study was carried out.Compliance with hand hygiene was estimated by measuring the utilization...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Intensive & critical care nursing 2022-04, Vol.69, p.103165-103165, Article 103165
Main Authors: Battistella, Giuseppe, Berto, Giuliana, Gasparotto, Umberto, Milana, Marzio, Farnia, Antonio, Bazzo, Stefania
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Action research
Alcohol
Consumption
Cross Infection
Effectiveness
Evaluation
Guideline Adherence
Hand Disinfection - methods
Hand Hygiene
Health Services Research
Hospitals
Humans
Hygiene
Intensive care
Intensive care unit
Intensive Care Units
Intensive treatment
Intervention
Long term
Organisational change
Prospective Studies
Questionnaires
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:To evaluate the long-term effectiveness of an action research intervention aimed at improving hand hygiene in an intensive care unit of a public hospital in Italy. An observational, prospective before-after study was carried out.Compliance with hand hygiene was estimated by measuring the utilization of hand hygiene products before the intervention and four years after the end of the project. Products used were the following: detergent liquid soap, antiseptic liquid soap and alcohol-based hand gel. Endpoints were quantity consumed (in grams) for each product category. Quantitative consumptions per workshift were compared. In 2017 the median consumption of antiseptic liquid soap and alcohol-based hand gel per workshift was significantly higher than in 2012 (111.5 g vs 72.5 g, p = 0.014, and 18.0 g vs 5.0 g, p 
ISSN:0964-3397
1532-4036
DOI:10.1016/j.iccn.2021.103165