Electronic monitoring and voice prompts improve hand hygiene and decrease nosocomial infections in an intermediate care unit*
- 1 February 2004
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Critical Care Medicine
- Vol. 32 (2) , 358-363
- https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ccm.0000108866.48795.0f
Abstract
Objective To determine whether electronic monitoring of hand hygiene and voice prompts can improve hand hygiene and decrease nosocomial infection rates in a surgical intermediate care unit. Design Three-phase quasi-experimental design. Phase I was electronic monitoring and direct observation; phase II was electronic monitoring and computerized voice prompts for failure to perform hand hygiene on room exit; and phase III was electronic monitoring only. Setting Nine-room, 14-bed intermediate care unit in a university, tertiary-care institution. All patient rooms, utility room, and staff lavatory were monitored electronically. Participants All healthcare personnel including physicians, nurses, nursing support personnel, ancillary staff, all visitors and family members, and any other personnel interacting with patients on the intermediate care unit. All patients with an intermediate care unit length of stay >48 hrs were followed for nosocomial infection. Interventions Electronic monitoring during all phases, computerized voice prompts during phase II only. Measurements and Main Results We evaluated a total of 283,488 electronically monitored entries into a patient room with 251,526 exits for 420 days (10,080 hrs and 3,549 patient days). Compared with phase I, hand hygiene compliance in patient rooms improved 37% during phase II (odds ratio, 1.38; 95% confidence interval, 1.04–1.83) and 41% in phase III (odds ratio, 1.41; 95% confidence interval, 1.07–1.84). When adjusting for patient admissions during each phase, point estimates of nosocomial infections decreased by 22% during phase II and 48% during phase III; when adjusting for patient days, the number of infections decreased by 10% during phase II and 40% during phase III. Although the overall rate of nosocomial infections significantly decreased when combining phases II and III, the association between nosocomial infection and individual phase was not significant. Conclusions Electronic monitoring provided effective ongoing feedback about hand hygiene compliance. During both the voice prompt phase and postintervention phase, hand hygiene compliance and nosocomial infection rates improved suggesting that ongoing monitoring and feedback had both a short-term and, perhaps, a longer-term effect.Keywords
This publication has 14 references indexed in Scilit:
- Handwashing Compliance Depends on Professional StatusSurgical Infections, 2001
- Compliance with Handwashing in a Teaching HospitalAnnals of Internal Medicine, 1999
- Prevalence and Risk Factors for Nosocomial Infections in Four University Hospitals in SwitzerlandInfection Control & Hospital Epidemiology, 1999
- Behavioral interventions to improve infection control practicesAmerican Journal of Infection Control, 1998
- No Time for Handwashing!? Handwashing versus Alcoholic Rub: Can We Afford 100% Compliance?Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology, 1997
- The Role of Understaffing in Central Venous Catheter-Associated Bloodstream InfectionsInfection Control & Hospital Epidemiology, 1996
- APIC guidelines for handwashing and hand antisepsis in health care settingsAmerican Journal of Infection Control, 1995
- Compliance with handwashing and barrier precautionsJournal of Hospital Infection, 1995
- The Role of Understaffing and Overcrowding in Recurrent Outbreaks of Staphylococcal Infection in a Neonatal Special-Care UnitThe Journal of Infectious Diseases, 1982
- Hand-Washing Patterns in Medical Intensive-Care UnitsNew England Journal of Medicine, 1981