Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T05:46:55.628Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Interventions to improve healthcare workers’ hand hygiene compliance: A systematic review of systematic reviews

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 December 2018

Lesley Price Open the ORCID record for Lesley Price [Opens in a new window] ,
Jennifer MacDonald ,
Lucyna Gozdzielewska ,
Tracey Howe ,
Paul Flowers ,
Lesley Shepherd ,
Yvonne Watt  and
Jacqui Reilly
Lesley Price*
Affiliation:
Safeguarding Health through Infection Prevention Research Group, School of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
Jennifer MacDonald
Affiliation:
Safeguarding Health through Infection Prevention Research Group, School of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
Lucyna Gozdzielewska
Affiliation:
Safeguarding Health through Infection Prevention Research Group, School of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
Tracey Howe
Affiliation:
School of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
Paul Flowers
Affiliation:
Safeguarding Health through Infection Prevention Research Group, School of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
Lesley Shepherd
Affiliation:
Health Protection Scotland, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
Yvonne Watt
Affiliation:
School of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
Jacqui Reilly
Affiliation:
Safeguarding Health through Infection Prevention Research Group, School of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom Health Protection Scotland, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
*
Author for correspondence: Lesley Price, Safeguarding Health through Infection Prevention Research Group, School of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Cowcaddens Road, Glasgow, G4 0BA, UK. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective

To synthesize the existing evidence base of systematic reviews of interventions to improve healthcare worker (HCW) hand hygiene compliance (HHC).

Methods

PRISMA guidelines were followed, and 10 information sources were searched in September 2017, with no limits to language or date of publication, and papers were screened against inclusion criteria for relevance. Data were extracted and risk of bias was assessed.

Results

Overall, 19 systematic reviews (n=20 articles) were included. Only 1 article had a low risk of bias. Moreover, 15 systematic reviews showed positive effects of interventions on HCW HHC, whereas 3 reviews evaluating monitoring technology did not. Findings regarding whether multimodal rather than single interventions are preferable were inconclusive. Targeting social influence, attitude, self-efficacy, and intention were associated with greater effectiveness. No clear link emerged between how educational interventions were delivered and effectiveness.

Conclusions

This is the first systematic review of systematic reviews of interventions to improve HCW HHC. The evidence is sufficient to recommend the implementation of interventions to improve HCW HHC (except for monitoring technology), but it is insufficient to make specific recommendations regarding the content or how the content should be delivered. Future research should rigorously apply behavior change theory, and recommendations should be clearly described with respect to intervention content and how it is delivered. Such recommendations should be tested for longer terms using stronger study designs with clearly defined outcomes.

Type
Original Article
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 39 , Issue 12 , December 2018 , pp. 1449 - 1456
Copyright
© 2018 by The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America. All rights reserved. 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

PREVIOUS PRESENTATION: Results based on a search of the literature up to June 2016 were presented on September 19, 2017, at the Annual Conference of the Infection Prevention Society, held in the Manchester Central Convention Complex, England, United Kingdom. This presentation resulted in the following abstract: Price L, MacDonald J, Gozdzielewska L, et al. An overview of systematic reviews of interventions designed to improve healthcare workers’ hand hygiene compliance. J Infect Prev 2017;18:S56–S57.

Cite this article: Price L, et al. (2018). Interventions to improve healthcare workers’ hand hygiene compliance: A systematic review of systematic reviews. Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology 2018, 39, 1449–1456. doi: 10.1017/ice.2018.262

References

1. Marchetti, A, Rossiter, R. Economic burden of healthcare-associated infection in US acute care hospitals: societal perspective. J Med Econ 2013;16:1399–1404.Google Scholar
2. World Health Organization. WHO guidelines on hand hygiene in health care. World Health Organization website. http://www.who.int/gpsc/5may/tools/9789241597906/en/. Published 2009. Accessed January 11, 2018.Google Scholar
3. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Summary: Point prevalence survey of healthcare associated infections and antimicrobial use in European acute care hospitals. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control website. https://ecdc.europa.eu/sites/portal/files/media/en/healthtopics/Healthcare-associated_infections/point-prevalence-survey/Documents/healthcare-associated-infections-antimicrobial-use-PPS-summary.pdf. Published 2009. Accessed January 11, 2018.Google Scholar
4. Allegranzi, B, Nejad, SB, Combescure, C, et al. Burden of endemic health-care-associated infection in developing countries: SYSTEMATIC review and meta-analysis. Lancet 2011;377:228–241.Google Scholar
5. Cassini, A, Plachouras, D, Eckmanns, T, et al. Burden of six healthcare-associated infections on European population health: estimating incidence-based disability-adjusted life years through a population prevalence-based modelling study. PLoS Med 2016;13:e1002150.Google Scholar
6. Ling, ML, Apisarnthanarak, A, Madriaga, G. The burden of healthcare-associated infections in Southeast Asia: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Clin Infect Dis 2015;60:1690–1699.Google Scholar
7. Nejad, SB, Allegranzi, B, Syed, SB, Ellis, B, Pittet, D. Health-care-associated infection in Africa: a systematic review. Bull World Health Organ 2011;89:757–765.Google Scholar
8. Allegranzi, B, Pittet, D. Role of hand hygiene in healthcare-associated infection prevention. J Hosp Infect 2009;73:305–315.Google Scholar
9. Boyce, JM, Pittet, D, Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee, HICPAC/SHEA/APIC/IDSA Hand Hygiene Task Force. Guideline for hand hygiene in health-care settings: recommendations of the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee and the HICPAC/SHEA/APIC/IDSA Hand Hygiene Task Force. MMWR Recomm Rep 2002;51:1–45.Google Scholar
10. Arias, AV, Garcell, HG, Ochoa, YR, Arias, KF, Miranda, FR. Assessment of hand hygiene techniques using the World Health Organization’s six steps. J Infect Public Health 2016;9:366–369.Google Scholar
11. Erasmus, V, Daha, TJ, Brug, H, et al. Systematic review of studies on compliance with hand hygiene guidelines in hospital care. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2010;31:283–294.Google Scholar
12. Laustsen, S, Lund, E, Bibby, BM, Kristensen, B, Thulstrup, AM, Møller, J. Effect of correctly using alcohol-based hand rub in a clinical setting. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2008;29:954–956.Google Scholar
13. Park, H, Kim, S, Lim, Y, et al. Assessment of the appropriateness of hand surface coverage for healthcare workers according to World Health Organization hand hygiene guidelines. Am J Infect Control 2014;42:559–561.Google Scholar
14. Reilly, JS, Price, L, Lang, S, et al. A pragmatic randomized controlled trial of 6-step vs 3-step hand hygiene technique in acute hospital care in the United Kingdom. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2016;37:661–666.Google Scholar
15. Thivichon-Prince, B, Barsotti, O, Girard, R, Morrier, J. Hand hygiene practices in a dental teaching center: measures and improve. Eur J Dent 2014;8:481–486.Google Scholar
16. Tschudin-Sutter, S, Sepulcri, D, Dangel, M, Schuhmacher, H, Widmer, AF. Compliance with the world health organization hand hygiene technique: a prospective observational study. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2015;36:482–483.Google Scholar
17. Widmer, AF, Conzelmann, M, Tomic, M, Frei, R, Stranden, AM. Introducing alcohol-based hand rub for hand hygiene: the critical need for training. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2007;28:50–54.Google Scholar
18. Naikoba, S, Hayward, A. The effectiveness of interventions aimed at increasing handwashing in healthcare workers: a systematic review. J Hosp Infect 2001;47:173–180.Google Scholar
19. Currie, K, Duguid, C, Flowers, P, et al. An overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of interventions designed to improve healthcare workers’ hand hygiene compliance. York: PROSPERO 2016 CRD42016040027. http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.asp?ID=CRD42016040027. Published 2016. Accessed January 11, 2018.Google Scholar
20. Moher, D, Liberati, A, Tetzlaff, J, Altman, DG, PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med 2009;151:264–269.Google Scholar
21. Price, L, MacDonald, J, Melone, L, et al. Effectiveness of national and sub-national infection prevention and control interventions in high and upper-middle income countries: outcomes of a systematic literature review. Lancet Infect Dis 2018;18:e159–e171.Google Scholar
22. Search filters. Edinburgh: Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network website. http://www.sign.ac.uk/methodology/filters.html. Published 2013. Accessed January 11, 2018.Google Scholar
23. Whiting, P, Savović, J, Higgins, JP, et al. ROBIS: a new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed. J Clin Epidemiol 2016;69:225–234.Google Scholar
24. Popay, J, Roberts, H, Sowden, A, et al. Guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews. ESRC Research Methods Programme website. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.178.3100&rep=rep1&type=pdf. Published 2006. Accessed January 11, 2018.Google Scholar
25. Cherry, MG, Brown, JM, Bethell, GS, Neal, T, Shaw, NJ. Features of educational interventions that lead to compliance with hand hygiene in healthcare professionals within a hospital care setting. A BEME systematic review: BEME Guide No. 22. Med Teach 2012;34:e406–e420.Google Scholar
26. Doronina, O, Jones, D, Martello, M, Biron, A, Lavoie-Tremblay, M. A systematic review on the effectiveness of interventions to improve hand hygiene compliance of nurses in the hospital setting. J Nurs Scholarsh 2017;49:143–152.Google Scholar
27. Gould, DJ, Moralejo, D, Drey, N, Chudleigh, JH, Taljaard, M. Interventions to improve hand hygiene compliance in patient care. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017;9:CD005186.Google Scholar
28. Huis, A, van Achterberg, T, de Bruin, M, Grol, R, Schoonhoven, L, Hulscher, M. A systematic review of hand hygiene improvement strategies: a behavioural approach. Implement Sci 2012;7:92.Google Scholar
29. Kingston, L, O’Connell, NH, Dunne, CP, O’Connell, NH. Hand hygiene-related clinical trials reported since 2010: a systematic review. J Hosp Infect 2016;92:309–320.Google Scholar
30. Luangasanatip, N, Hongsuwan, M, Limmathurotsakul, D, et al. Comparative efficacy of interventions to promote hand hygiene in hospital: systematic review and network meta-analysis. BMJ 2015;351:h3728.Google Scholar
31. Mitchell, MD, Betesh, J, Ravitz, N, Runyan, D, Umscheid, CA. Automated Hand Hygiene Monitoring Systems. Philadelphia, PA: Center for Evidence-based Practice, 2014.Google Scholar
32. Neo, JRJ, Sagha-Zadeh, R, Vielemeyer, O, Franklin, E. Evidence-based practices to increase hand hygiene compliance in health care facilities: an integrated review. Am J Infect Control 2016;44:691–704.Google Scholar
33. Ofek Shlomai, N, Rao, S, Patole, S. Efficacy of interventions to improve hand hygiene compliance in neonatal units: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2015;34:887–897.Google Scholar
34. Picheansathian, W. A systematic review on the effectiveness of alcohol-based solutions for hand hygiene. Int J Nurs Pract 2004;10:3–9.Google Scholar
35. Ranji, SR, Shetty, K, Posley, KA, et al. Prevention of Healthcare-Associated Infections. Vol 6 of Shojania KG, McDonald KM, Wachter RM, and Owens DK (editors). Closing the Quality Gap: A Critical Analysis of Quality Improvement Strategies. Technical Review 9 (Prepared by the Stanford University-UCSF Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. 290-02-0017). AHRQ Publication No. 04(07)-0051-6. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 2007. https://www.ahrq.gov/downloads/pub/evidence/pdf/qualgap6/hainfgap.pdf. Published 2007. Accessed January 11, 2018.Google Scholar
36. Ritchie, K, Iqbal, K, Macpherson, K, Riches, E, Stout, A. The provision of alcohol based products to improve compliance with hand hygiene. Healthcare Improvement Scotland website. http://www.healthcareimprovementscotland.org/previous_resources/hta_report/hta_7.aspx. Published 2005. Accessed January 11, 2018.Google Scholar
37. Stout, A, Ritchie, K, Macpherson, K. Clinical effectiveness of alcohol-based products in increasing hand hygiene compliance and reducing infection rates: a systematic review. J Hosp Infect 2007;66:308–312.Google Scholar
38. Schweizer, ML, Reisinger, HS, Ohl, M, et al. Searching for an optimal hand hygiene bundle: A meta-analysis. Clin Infect Dis 2014;58:248–259.Google Scholar
39. Srigley, JA, Corace, K, Hargadon, DP, et al. Applying psychological frameworks of behaviour change to improve healthcare worker hand hygiene: a systematic review. J Hosp Infect 2015;91:202–210.Google Scholar
40. Srigley, JA, Gardam, M, Fernie, G, Lightfoot, D, Lebovic, G, Muller, MP. Hand hygiene monitoring technology: a systematic review of efficacy. J Hosp Infect 2015;89:51–60.Google Scholar
41. Stiller, A, Salm, F, Bischoff, P, Gastmeier, P. Relationship between hospital design and healthcare-associated infection rates: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control 2016;5:51.Google Scholar
42. Vindigni, SM, Riley, PL, Jhung, M. Systematic review: handwashing behaviour in low- to middle-income countries: outcome measures and behaviour maintenance. Trop Med Int Health 2011;16:466–477.Google Scholar
43. Ward, MA, Schweizer, ML, Polgreen, PM, Gupta, K, Reisinger, HS, Perencevich, EN. Automated and electronically assisted hand hygiene monitoring systems: a systematic review. Am J Infect Control 2014;42:472–478.Google Scholar
44. Cheung, A, Weir, W, Mayhew, A, Kozloff, N, Brown, K, Grimshaw, J. Overview of systematic reviews of the effectiveness of reminders in improving healthcare professional behavior. Syst Rev 2012;1:36.Google Scholar
45. Lorimer, K, Kidd, L, Lawrence, M, McPherson, K, Cayless, S, Cornish, F. Systematic review of reviews of behavioural HIV prevention interventions among men who have sex with men. AIDS Care 2012;25:133–150.Google Scholar
46. Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation Care. What study designs should be included in an EPOC review and what should they be called? EPOC Resources for review authors website. http://epoc.cochrane.org/sites/epoc.cochrane.org/files/public/uploads/Resources-for-authors2017/what_study_designs_should_be_included_in_an_epoc_review.pdf. Published 2017. Accessed January 11, 2018.Google Scholar
47. Chudleigh, J, Drey, N, Moralejo, D, Gould, DJ. Systematic reviews of hand hygiene in patient care post 2010. J Hosp Infect 2016;94:110–111.Google Scholar
48. Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation Care. Suggested risk of bias criteria for EPOC reviews. EPOC Resources for review authors website. http://epoc.cochrane.org/sites/epoc.cochrane.org/files/public/uploads/Resources-for-authors2017/suggested_risk_of_bias_criteria_for_epoc_reviews.pdf. Published 2107. Accessed January 11, 2018.Google Scholar
49. Zingg, W, Castro-Sanchez, E, Secci, FV, et al. Innovative tools for quality assessment: integrated quality criteria for review of multiple study designs (ICROMS). Public Health 2016;133:19–37.Google Scholar
50. Wells, GA, Shea, B, O’Connell, D, et al. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses. University of Ottawa website. http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp Published 2000. Accessed January 11, 2018.Google Scholar
51. Jadad, AR, Moore, RA, Carroll, D, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 1996;17:1–12.Google Scholar
52. Rosella, L, Bowman, C, Pach, B, Morgan, S, Fitzpatrick, T, Goel, V. The development and validation of a meta-tool for quality appraisal of public health evidence: meta Quality Appraisal Tool (MetaQAT). Public Health 2016;136:57–65.Google Scholar
53. Anderson, LA, Sharpe, PA. Improving patient and provider communication: A synthesis and review of communication interventions. Patient Educ Couns 1991;17:99–134.Google Scholar
54. Downs, SH, Black, N. The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions. J Epidemiol Community Health 1998;52:377–384.Google Scholar
55. Higgins, JPT, Altman, DG, Sterne, JAC. Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration website. http://handbook.cochrane.org/ Published 2011. Accessed January 11, 2018.Google Scholar
56. Systematic reviews: CRD’s guidance for undertaking reviews in healthcare. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination website. http://www.york.ac.uk/crd/guidance/. Published 2009. Accessed January 11, 2018.Google Scholar
57. Higgins, JPT, Green, S. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration website. http://handbook.cochrane.org/. Published 2011. Accessed January 11, 2018.Google Scholar
58. SIGN 50: A guideline developer’s handbook. Edinburgh: Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network website. http://www.sign.ac.uk/sign-50.html. Published 2015. Accessed January 11, 2018.Google Scholar
59. Michie, S, West, R. Behaviour change theory and evidence: a presentation to Government. Health Psychol Rev 2013;7:1–22.Google Scholar
60. NICE guidelines PH49 Behaviour change: Individual approaches (Recommendation 10 Ensure behaviour change is maintained for at least a year). National Institute for Health and Care Excellence website. https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ph49/chapter/1-recommendations#recommendation-10-ensure-behaviour-change-is-maintained-for-at-least-a-year. Published 2014. Accessed January 11, 2018.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Lesley Price et al. supplementary material

Lesley Price et al. supplementary material 1

Download Lesley Price et al. supplementary material(File)
File 69 KB