Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Frequency of Use of Alcohol-Based Hand Rubs by Nurses: A Systematic Review

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2016


John M. Boyce
Affiliation:
J. M. Boyce Consulting, Middletown, Connecticut
Philip M. Polgreen
Affiliation:
Department of Internal Medicine and Department of Epidemiology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa
Mauricio Monsalve
Affiliation:
Department of Computer Science, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa Centro de Investigacion para la Gestion Integrada de Desastres Naturales, Chile
David R. Macinga
Affiliation:
GOJO Industries, Akron, Ohio
James W. Arbogast
Affiliation:
GOJO Industries, Akron, Ohio
Corresponding
E-mail address:

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Recently, the US Food and Drug Administration requested that a “maximal use” trial be conducted to ensure the safety of frequent use of alcohol-based hand rubs (ABHRs) by healthcare workers.

OBJECTIVE

To establish how frequently volunteers should be exposed to ABHR during a maximal use trial.

DESIGN

Retrospective review of literature and analysis of 2 recent studies that utilized hand hygiene electronic compliance monitoring (ECM) systems.

METHODS

We reviewed PubMed for articles published between 1970 and December 31, 2015, containing the terms hand washing, hand hygiene, hand hygiene compliance, and alcohol-based hand rubs. Article titles, abstracts, or text were reviewed to determine whether the frequency of ABHR use by healthcare workers was reported. Two studies using hand hygiene ECM systems were reviewed to determine how frequently nurses used ABHR per shift and per hour.

RESULTS

Of 3,487 citations reviewed, only 10 reported how frequently individual healthcare workers used ABHR per shift or per hour. Very conservative estimates of the frequency of ABHR use were reported owing to shortcomings of the methods utilized. The greatest frequency of ABHR use was recorded by an ECM system in a medical intensive care unit. In 95% of nursing shifts, individual nurses used ABHR 141 times or less per shift, and 15 times or less per hour.

CONCLUSIONS

Hand hygiene ECM systems established that the frequency of exposure to ABHRs varies substantially among nurses. Our findings should be useful in designing how frequently individuals should be exposed to ABHR during a maximal use trial.

Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:189–195


Type
Original Articles
Copyright
© 2016 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.

References

1. 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. MMWR Recomm Rep 2002;51:145.Google ScholarPubMed
2. World Health Organization. WHO Guidelines for Hand Hygiene in Health Care. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2009.Google ScholarPubMed
3. US Food and Drug Administration. Proposed rule: safety and effectiveness of health care antiseptics. Fed Regist 2015;80:84.Google Scholar
4. Boyce, JM, Cooper, T, Lunde, A, Yin, J, Arbogast, J. Impact of an electronic hand hygiene monitoring system trial on hand hygiene compliance in a surgical intensive care unit and general medical ward. In: Program and abstracts of 2012 IDWeek; October 19, 2012; San Diego, CA. Abstract 1008.Google Scholar
5. Monsalve, MN, Pemmaraju, SV, Thomas, GW, et al. Do peer effects improve hand hygiene adherence among healthcare workers? Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2014;35:12771285.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6. Pittet, D, Mourouga, P, Perneger, TV. Compliance with handwashing in a teaching hospital. Infection Control Program. Ann Intern Med 1999;130:126130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Hugonnet, S, Perneger, TV, Pittet, D. Alcohol-based handrub improves compliance with hand hygiene in intensive care units. Arch Intern Med 2002;162:10371043.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8. Cohen, B, Hyman, S, Rosenberg, L, Larson, E. Frequency of patient contact with health care personnel and visitors: implications for infection prevention. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2012;38:560565.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9. Westbrook, JI, Li, L, Georgiou, A, Paoloni, R, Cullen, J. Impact of an electronic medication management system on hospital doctors’ and nurses’ work: a controlled pre-post, time and motion study. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2013;20:11501158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Westbrook, JI, Duffield, C, Li, L, Creswick, NJ. How much time do nurses have for patients? A longitudinal study quantifying hospital nurses’ patterns of task time distribution and interactions with health professionals. BMC Health Serv Res 2011;11:319.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11. Meengs, MR, Giles, BK, Chisholm, CD, Cordell, WH, Nelson, DR. Hand washing frequency in an emergency department. Ann Emerg Med 1994;23:13071312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Levchenko, AI, Boscart, VM, Fernie, GR. The feasibility of an automated monitoring system to improve nurses’ hand hygiene. Int J Med Inform 2011;80:596603.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13. Witterick, P, Stuart, R, Gillespie, E, Buist, M. Hand hygiene during the intensive care unit ward round: how much is enough? An observational study. Crit Care Resusc 2008;10:285287.Google ScholarPubMed
14. Koff, MD, Loftus, RW, Burchman, CC, et al. Reduction in intraoperative bacterial contamination of peripheral intravenous tubing through the use of a novel device. Anesthesiology 2009;110:978985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15. Krediet, AC, Kalkman, CJ, Bonten, MJ, Gigengack, AC, Barach, P. Hand-hygiene practices in the operating theatre: an observational study. Br J Anaesth 2011;107:553558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16. Larson, E, Silberger, M, Jakob, K, et al. Assessment of alternative hand hygiene regimens to improve skin health among neonatal intensive care unit nurses. Heart Lung 2000;29:136142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Winnefeld, M, Richard, MA, Drancourt, M, Grobb, JJ. Skin tolerance and effectiveness of two hand decontamination procedures in everyday hospital use. Br J Dermatol 2000;143:546550.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18. Boyce, JM, Kelliher, S, Vallande, N. Skin irritation and dryness associated with two hand hygiene regimens: soap and water handwashing versus hand antisepsis with an alcoholic hand gel. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2000;21:442448.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19. Visser, MJ, Behroozy, A, Verberk, MM, Semple, S, Kezic, S. Quantification of wet-work exposure in nurses using a newly developed wet-work exposure monitor. Ann Occup Hyg 2011;55:810816.Google Scholar
20. Storey, SJ, FitzGerald, G, Moore, G, et al. Effect of a contact monitoring system with immediate visual feedback on hand hygiene compliance. J Hosp Infect 2014;88:8488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21. Muller, MP, Levchenko, AI, Ing, S, Pong, SM, Fernie, GR. Electronic monitoring of individual healthcare workers’ hand hygiene event rate. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2014;35:11891192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22. Radhakrishna, K, Waghmare, A, Ekstrand, M, et al. Real-time feedback for improving compliance to hand sanitization among healthcare workers in an open layout ICU using radiofrequency identification. J Med Syst 2015;39:68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23. Monsalve, M, Pemmaraju, S, Polgreen, PM. Interactions in an intensive care unit: experiences pre-processing sensor network data. In: Program and abstracts of the 4th Conference on Wireless Health; November 1-3, 2013; Baltimore, MD.Google Scholar
24. Steed, C, Kelly, JW, Blackhurst, D, et al. Hospital hand hygiene opportunities: where and when (HOW2)? The HOW2 Benchmark Study. Am J Infect Control 2011;39:1926.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
25. Fries, J, Segre, AM, Thomas, G, et al. Monitoring hand hygiene via human observers: how should we be sampling? Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2012;33:689695.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
26. Marra, AR, Moura, DF Jr, Paes, AT, dos Santos, OF, Edmond, MB. Measuring rates of hand hygiene adherence in the intensive care setting: a comparative study of direct observation, product usage, and electronic counting devices. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2010;31:796801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27. Morgan, DJ, Pineles, L, Shardell, M, et al. Automated hand hygiene count devices may better measure compliance than human observation. Am J Infect Control 2012;40:955959.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28. Magnus, TP, Marra, AR, Camargo, TZ, et al. Measuring hand hygiene compliance rates in different special care settings: a comparative study of methodologies. Int J Infect Dis 2015;33:205208.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
29. Kinsella, G, Thomas, AN, Taylor, RJ. Electronic surveillance of wall-mounted soap and alcohol gel dispensers in an intensive care unit. J Hosp Infect 2016;66:3439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Altmetric attention score


Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 116
Total number of PDF views: 999 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 07th November 2016 - 3rd December 2020. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Hostname: page-component-79f79cbf67-cqrxk Total loading time: 1.005 Render date: 2020-12-03T05:34:40.986Z Query parameters: { "hasAccess": "0", "openAccess": "0", "isLogged": "0", "lang": "en" } Feature Flags last update: Thu Dec 03 2020 05:06:42 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) Feature Flags: { "metrics": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "peerReview": true, "crossMark": true, "comments": true, "relatedCommentaries": true, "subject": true, "clr": false, "languageSwitch": true }

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Frequency of Use of Alcohol-Based Hand Rubs by Nurses: A Systematic Review
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Frequency of Use of Alcohol-Based Hand Rubs by Nurses: A Systematic Review
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Frequency of Use of Alcohol-Based Hand Rubs by Nurses: A Systematic Review
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *