The effectiveness of hand hygiene interventions for preventing community transmission or acquisition of novel coronavirus or influenza infections: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Novel coronaviruses and influenza can cause infection, epidemics, and pandemics. Improving hand hygiene (HH) of the general public is recommended for preventing these infections. This systematic review examined the effectiveness of HH interventions for preventing transmission or acquisition of such infections in the community. METHODS: PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL and Web of Science databases were searched (January 2002-February 2022) for empirical studies related to HH in the general public and to the acquisition or transmission of novel coronavirus infections or influenza. Studies on healthcare staff, and with outcomes of compliance or absenteeism were excluded. Study selection, data extraction and quality assessment, using the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care risk of bias criteria or Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal checklists, were conducted by one reviewer, and double-checked by another. For intervention studies, effect estimates were calculated while the remaining studies were synthesised narratively. The protocol was pre-registered (PROSPERO 2020: CRD42020196525). RESULTS: Twenty-two studies were included. Six were intervention studies evaluating the effectiveness of HH education and provision of products, or hand washing against influenza. Only two school-based interventions showed a significant protective effect (OR: 0.64; 95% CI 0.51, 0.80 and OR: 0.40; 95% CI 0.22, 0.71), with risk of bias being high (n = 1) and unclear (n = 1). Of the 16 non-intervention studies, 13 reported the protective effect of HH against influenza, SARS or COVID-19 (P < 0.05), but risk of bias was high (n = 7), unclear (n = 5) or low (n = 1). However, evidence in relation to when, and how frequently HH should be performed was inconsistent. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review of effectiveness of HH for prevention of community transmission or acquisition of respiratory viruses that have caused epidemics or pandemics, including SARS-CoV-1, SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses. The evidence supporting the protective effect of HH was heterogeneous and limited by methodological quality; thus, insufficient to recommend changes to current HH guidelines. Future work is required to identify in what circumstances, how frequently and what product should be used when performing HH in the community and to develop effective interventions for promoting these specific behaviours in communities during epidemics.

World Health Organization World Hand Hygiene Day, 5 May 2024. SAVE LIVES: Clean Your Hands campaign: Promoting knowledge and capacity building on infection prevention and control, including hand hygiene, among health and care workers.

The World Health Organization's (WHO) World Hand Hygiene Day continues to "bring people together and accelerate hand hygiene action at the point of care in health care to contribute to a reduction in health care-associated infections and the achievement of safer, quality health care for all."

World Health Organization World Hand Hygiene Day, 5 May 2024. SAVE LIVES: clean your hands campaign: promoting knowledge and capacity building on infection prevention and control, including hand hygiene, among health and care workers.

The World Health Organization's (WHO) World Hand Hygiene Day continues to "bring people together and accelerate hand hygiene action at the point of care in health care to contribute to a reduction in health care-associated infections and the achievement of safer, quality health care for all".

Improving adherence to hand hygiene practice.

Hand hygiene compliance rates continue to vary between healthcare settings and individual professionals. This article looks at how a multimodal approach to infection prevention and control, using expertise from other disciplines, can increase compliance with hand hygiene practices.

Minimising risk in the use of central lines.

Central lines are inserted for a number of clinical reasons, including to measure central venous pressure and the regular administration of intravenous drugs. One of their benefits is that several treatments can be given simultaneously. However, they are invasive and tend to leave patients prone to infection, so careful management is vital. This article focuses on the risk of infection, particularly of the bloodstream.

Hand hygiene--when and how should it be done?

Practising hand hygiene at the right times to prevent healthcare-associated infections is one of the most important patient care practices health professionals can undertake. However, changing behaviour to ensure staff practise appropriate hand hygiene requires a multifaceted approach. This article highlights two important aspects of the message staff need--the when and the how of hand hygiene.

Hand hygiene improvement in the community: a systems approach.

Hand hygiene compliance, which is influenced in part by human behaviour, is central to infection prevention in all care settings. This article focuses specifically on the importance of a multimodal strategy for continued hand hygiene improvement, and its relevance to community nursing. Additionally, the article addresses the challenges and opportunities of infection prevention and control in a community context, and highlights current national and international guidelines that offer a framework and set of principles for implementation and sustainability with a specific focus on the multimodal strategy associated with the WHO Guidelines on Hand Hygiene in Health Care (2009). The authors conclude with some considerations for community nurses when addressing translation of these principles into their everyday working context.

Importance of hand hygiene during invasive procedures.

Invasive devices, such as urinary catheters and peripheral and central venous catheters, can form part of essential patient care and may provide life-saving support and treatment. However, the invasive nature of these devices and the vulnerability of patients can increase the risk of acquiring a healthcare-associated infection (HCAI). This article highlights the importance of best practice in relation to insertion and management of invasive devices, incorporating hand hygiene, to reduce the risk of HCAI. Although the information can be applied to invasive devices in general, the focus is on urinary catheters.

Time for a renewed focus on the role of cleaners in achieving safe health care in low- and middle-income countries.

Water, sanitation and hygiene, collectively known as WASH, is an enabler of infection prevention and control (IPC), both of which contribute to safe, quality health care and the prevention of spread of antimicrobial resistance (AMR). This discussion paper considers the importance placed on the role of hygiene, including cleaning and those who clean, in health care facilities, within the context of existing data, guidelines and initiatives. Informed by this, the paper presents five areas for consideration that have the potential to strengthen and further demonstrate the value of this important cadre of staff and their role in clean, safe healthcare, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. The considerations centre around actions to overcome the current data gaps, including the paucity of national data on environmental cleaning and the training of cleaners; strengthening the implementation of norms and standards; combining global and national advocacy efforts; revisiting investment; and addressing research gaps on the issue. The need to act, in line with WHO and UNICEF recommendations to address this overlooked and undercompensated workforce and to elevate their status as important contributors to IPC, WASH and AMR is a pressing one.

Infection prevention and control (IPC) implementation in low-resource settings: a qualitative analysis.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has again demonstrated the critical role of effective infection prevention and control (IPC) implementation to combat infectious disease threats. Standards such as the World Health Organization (WHO) IPC minimum requirements offer a basis, but robust evidence on effective IPC implementation strategies in low-resource settings remains limited. We aimed to qualitatively assess IPC implementation themes in these settings. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with IPC experts from low-resource settings, guided by a standardised questionnaire. Applying a qualitative inductive thematic analysis, IPC implementation examples from interview transcripts were coded, collated into sub-themes, grouped again into broad themes, and finally reviewed to ensure validity. Sub-themes appearing ≥ 3 times in data were highlighted as frequent IPC implementation themes and all findings were summarised descriptively. RESULTS: Interviews were conducted with IPC experts from 29 countries in six WHO regions. Frequent IPC implementation themes including the related critical actions to achieve the WHO IPC core components included: (1) To develop IPC programmes: continuous advocacy with leadership, initial external technical assistance, stepwise approach to build resources, use of catalysts, linkages with other programmes, role of national IPC associations and normative legal actions; (2) To develop guidelines: early planning for their operationalization, initial external technical assistance and local guideline adaption; (3) To establish training: attention to methods, fostering local leadership, and sustainable health system linkages such as developing an IPC career path; (4) To establish health care-associated (HAI) surveillance: feasible but high-impact pilots, multidisciplinary collaboration, mentorship, careful consideration of definitions and data quality, and "data for action"; (5) To implement multimodal strategies: clear communication to explain multimodal strategies, attention to certain elements, and feasible but high-impact pilots; (6) To develop monitoring, audit and feedback: feasible but high-impact pilots, attention to methods such as positive (not punitive) incentives and "data for action"; (7) To improve staffing and bed occupancy: participation of national actors to set standards and attention to methods such as use of data; and (8) To promote built environment: involvement of IPC professionals in facility construction, attention to multimodal strategy elements, and long-term advocacy. CONCLUSIONS: These IPC implementation themes offer important qualitative evidence for IPC professionals to consider.

Core components of infection prevention and control programs at the facility level in Georgia: key challenges and opportunities.

BACKGROUND: The Georgia Ministry of Labor, Health, and Social Affairs is working to strengthen its Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) Program, but until recently has lacked an assessment of performance gaps and implementation challenges faced by hospital staff. METHODS: In 2018, health care hospitals were assessed using a World Health Organization (WHO) adapted tool aimed at implementing the WHO's IPC Core Components. The study included site assessments at 41 of Georgia's 273 hospitals, followed by structured interviews with 109 hospital staff, validation observations of IPC practices, and follow up document reviews. RESULTS: IPC programs for all hospitals were not comprehensive, with many lacking defined objectives, workplans, targets, and budget. All hospitals had at least one dedicated IPC staff member, 66% of hospitals had IPC staff with some formal IPC training; 78% of hospitals had IPC guidelines; and 55% had facility-specific standard operating procedures. None of the hospitals conducted structured monitoring of IPC compliance and only 44% of hospitals used IPC monitoring results to make unit/facility-specific IPC improvement plans. 54% of hospitals had clearly defined priority healthcare-associated infections (HAIs), standard case definitions and data collection methods in their HAI surveillance systems. 85% hospitals had access to a microbiology laboratory. All reported having posters or other tools to promote hand hygiene, 29% had them for injection safety. 68% of hospitals had functioning hand-hygiene stations available at all points of care. 88% had single patient isolation rooms; 15% also had rooms for cohorting patients. 71% reported having appropriate waste management system. CONCLUSIONS: Among the recommended WHO IPC core components, existing programs, infrastructure, IPC staffing, workload and supplies present within Georgian healthcare hospitals should allow for implementation of effective IPC. Development and dissemination of IPC Guidelines, implementation of an effective IPC training system and systematic monitoring of IPC practices will be an important first step towards implementing targeted IPC improvement plans in hospitals.

Enhancing engagement beyond the conference walls: analysis of Twitter use at #ICPIC2019 infection prevention and control conference.

BACKGROUND: Social media may provide a tool, when coupled with a patient-included™ conference, to enhance the engagement among the general public. We describe authors and potential readers of Twitter content surrounding a patient-included™ scientific congress, the International Consortium for Prevention and Infection Control (ICPIC) 2019. METHODS: Retrospective observational analysis of Twitter users posting with the #ICPIC2019 hashtag during the conference. Tweet authors, overall followers, and active followers were categorized according to their Twitter biographies using unsupervised learning. Diversity of professional backgrounds of Tweet authors and their followers was explored. Network analysis explored connectedness between the reach of authors. RESULTS: In total, 1264 participants attended ICPIC 2019, of which 28 were patients. From September 7 to 16, 2019, we were able to categorize 235'620 (41%) followers linked to 474 (76%) authors. Among authors and followers, respectively 34% and 14% were healthcare workers, 11% and 15% were from industry representatives, 8% and 7% were academic researchers. On average, 23% (range 9-39%) followers belonged to the same categories as authors. Among all followers categorized, only 582/235 620 (0.25%) interacted with original messages, including healthcare workers (37%), global and public health (12%), academic research (11%) and those from industry (11%). Though the similarity between Tweet authors and followers was supported by network analysis, we also observed that non-healthcare workers (including patients) appeared to have more diverse followers. CONCLUSIONS: We observed the participation of numerous Tweet authors and followers from diverse professional backgrounds potentially supporting the benefit of including patients in conferences to reach a more general, non-specialized public.

Implementation of World Health Organization Guidelines in the Prevention of Surgical Site Infection in Low- and Middle-Income Countries:What We Know and Do Not Know.

Background: In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), infection is the most frequent complication in surgical procedures, and surgical site infections (SSIs) globally are the most frequent health-care-associated infections (HAIs). Preventing SSI is an important target for overall quality improvement and patient safety as well as supporting the infection prevention and control (IPC) global agenda. Methods: In 2018, the World Heath Organization (WHO) presented the first Global Guidelines for the Prevention of Surgical Site Infections. The WHO also simplified SSI surveillance materials and included process measures, critical to addressing the barriers existing in LMICs. Because surveillance activities alone will not lead to improvements and implementation is more challenging than guideline development, the WHO then outlined a novel, step by step approach for implementation based on its tried and tested improvement approach for IPC measures. These documents have been reviewed and summarized to achieve wider reach in the surgical community. Results: The WHO implementation guidance notes examples of current practice against the WHO SSI prevention guideline recommendations and considers LMIC settings. It identifies the related problem that needs to be addressed if the recommendation is not being applied consistently and reliably. It breaks down the steps required to make an improvement applying key elements known as the multi-modal improvement strategy. Conclusions: Implementation of IPC guidance documents and tools published by global organizations and national governments continues to be a challenge, especially for LMICs. Successful approaches need to include a science-based approach to implementation and improvement, as well as joined up working and learning across IPC and surgical communities. Real improvements can be only achieved, based on WHO workforce recommendations, with IPC programs including the staff to execute these programs and using a proven approach.

Implementation of surgical site infection surveillance in low- and middle-income countries: A position statement for the International Society for Infectious Diseases.

Surgical site infection (SSI) rates in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) range from 8 to 30% of procedures, making them the most frequent healthcare-acquired infection (HAI) with substantial morbidity, mortality, and economic impacts. Presented here is an approach to surgical site infection prevention based on surveillance and focused on five critical areas identified by international experts. These five areas include 1. Collecting valid, high-quality data; 2. Linking HAIs to economic incapacity, underscoring the need to prioritize infection prevention activities; 3. Implementing SSI surveillance within infection prevention and control (IPC) programs to enact structural changes, develop procedural skills, and alter healthcare worker behaviors; 4. Prioritizing IPC training for healthcare workers in LMICs to conduct broad-based surveillance and to develop and implement locally applicable IPC programs; and 5. Developing a highly accurate and objective international system for defining SSIs, which can be translated globally in a straightforward manner. Finally, we present a clear, unambiguous framework for successful SSI guideline implementation that supports developing sustainable IPC programs in LMICs. This entails 1. Identifying index operations for targeted surveillance; 2. Identifying IPC "champions" and empowering healthcare workers; 3. Using multimodal improvement measures; 4. Positioning hand hygiene programs as the basis for IPC initiatives; 5. Use of telecommunication devices for surveillance and healthcare outcome follow-ups. Additionally, special considerations for pediatric SSIs, antimicrobial resistance development, and antibiotic stewardship programs are addressed.