Parental perspectives about information and deferred versus two-stage consent in studies of neonatal asphyxia.

OBJECTIVE: The ALBINO Trial (NCT03162653) investigates effects of very early postnatal allopurinol on neurocognitive outcome following perinatal asphyxia where prenatal informed consent (IC) is impossible. Ethically and legally, waiver of consent and/or deferred consent (DC) is acceptable in such an emergency. Short oral/two-step consent (SOC, brief information and oral consent followed by IC) has recently been investigated. METHODS: Mixed-methods analysis of parental opinions on DC versus SOC in the context of neonatal asphyxia in a survey at two German centres. Prospective parents (ProP), parents of healthy newborns (PNeo) and parents of asphyxiated infants (PAx) born between 2006 and 2016 were invited. RESULTS: 108 of 422 parents participated (ProP:43; PNeo:35; PAx:30). Most parents trusted physicians, wanted preinterventional information and agreed that in emergencies interventions should begin immediately. Intergroup and intragroup variability existed for questions about DC and SOC. In the ALBINO Trial situation, 55% preferred SOC, and 26% reported DC without information might adversely affect their trust. Only 3% reported to potentially take legal action after DC. PAx were significantly more likely to support DC. PAx more frequently expressed positive emotions and appreciation for neonatal research. In open-ended questions, parents gave many constructive recommendations. CONCLUSION: In this survey, parents expressed diverse opinions on consent, but the majority preferred SOC over DC. Parents who had experienced emergency admission of their asphyxiated neonates were more trusting. Obtaining parental perspectives is essential when designing studies, while being cognisant that these groups of parents may not represent the opinion of all parents.

Evaluation of measurement properties of the German Work Role Functioning Questionnaire.

OBJECTIVE: We assessed the measurement properties of the German Work Role Functioning Questionnaire (WRFQ) after its cross-cultural adaptation of the Dutch version. The WRFQ is a generic role-specific instrument that measures how a particular health status influences the ability to meet work demands. METHODS: We performed an observational study among German employees assessing the following measurement properties: 1) structural, 2) convergent and 3) discriminant validity, 4) floor and ceiling effects, 5) internal consistency, 6) reproducibility and 7) responsiveness. Participants were recruited from an online access panel sample aged 18 to 64 years having worked more than 12 hours in the last 4 weeks prior to study enrollment (n(T0) = 653, n(T1) = 66, n(T2) = 95). RESULTS: Measurement properties proved to be good except for structural validity and responsiveness. An exploratory factor analysis showed limited replicability of three of the four original subscales. CONCLUSION: With the WRFQ German version, the extent can be measured, to which employees with a certain health level experience problems can meet their work demands. This widely used health-related work outcome measurement tool, that helps to identify employees with decreasing work functioning, is now also available in German. This gives researchers and practitioners the opportunity to address work functioning in practice, e.g. in intervention studies in occupational health or rehabilitation. Further research to examine valid subscales is needed.

Uptake of Voluntary Occupational Health Care-Assessments of German Occupational Health Physicians and Employees.

Workers' health surveillance is considered essential for employees' health and protection against hazardous working conditions. It is one part of occupational health care and thus one of four pillars of holistic workplace health management. In Germany, employers are obliged to provide mandatory and voluntary occupational health care (OHC) to employees, dependent on the defined occupational hazards. However, employees are not obliged to make use of voluntary OHC. No empirical information is available about the uptake of voluntary OHC by employees and the influencing factors in Germany. Thus, we carried out an explorative multi-perspective study with qualitative and quantitative elements to get insights from the view of occupational health physicians (OHPs) and employees. We conducted a survey among OHPs based on prior statements from two focus group discussions. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to detect enablers and barriers regarding employee uptake of the offered voluntary OHC. We used extended qualitative methods among employees instead of an analogous survey. In total, 460 OHPs participated in the survey (response rate 29.1%), and 25 employees took part in interviews. Most of the employees had not heard the term voluntary OHC before, and only a few remembered respective occupational health care after explanatory request. In total, 78% of the OHPs assessed that employees always/mostly take up voluntary OHC. The most important attributed reason for non-uptake was that employees see no need for occupational health care when they feel healthy. The most important enabler for the perceived high uptake of voluntary OHC in the regression analysis was a positive attitude of the OHP toward voluntary OHC. While OHPs perceived that voluntary OHC was accepted by a majority of employees, this was not confirmed by the interviews with selected employees. This could indicate that the OHP respondents overestimated the amount of uptake. Since it became clear that employees are often unfamiliar with the terminology itself, we see a need for more and better information regarding the objectives and content of occupational health care to improve this important pillar of workplace health management.

[Organization and implementation of occupational health and safety in child day care centers]. / Organisation und Umsetzung des Arbeitsschutzes in Kitas.

Background and research question: Physical and mental stress as well as infection hazards of employees in child day care centers require compliance with governmental occupational health and safety (OHS) regulations. How well OHS is organized and how measures are actually implemented are not yet empirically known. This gap was closed with an epidemiological study on the status quo. Material and methods: In the second half of 2020 a total of 120 managers of day care centers in Germany, mostly church-run, which are member companies of the German Statutory Accident Insurance and Prevention in the Health and Welfare Services (BGW), were randomly selected and interviewed. This was done by members of the BGW prevention services using a standardized survey instrument. The surveyed aspects (mostly concerning the OHS organization) were summarized in a standardized sum index between 0 and 1 (worst to best occupational health and safety) and analyzed descriptively. Results: The requirements for the organization of OHS were fulfilled in many cases. There is still some potential left for improvement in the actual implementation of organized OHS requirements. The standardized sum index is 0.82 (standard deviation 0.16). Of the respondents two thirds rated OHS in their day care center as good/very good in a global item. In free texts, the desire for more information on OHS and better communication between the day care center and the respective provider was frequently expressed. Discussion and outlook: The results confirmed a higher formal quality of OHS as found in other cross-sectional studies. To continuously improve the actual implementation of organized measures, OHS management systems, which are still rarely used in day care centers, could have a supporting effect. Corresponding instruments are available and their use should be more strongly promoted in the future. Limitations of the study include possible bias due to responses to representatives of an institution that is also responsible for OHS inspections.

[Implementation of occupational health and safety during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic in hairdressers' salons]. / Umsetzung des Arbeitsschutzes während der SARS-CoV-2-Pandemie in Friseursalons.

BACKGROUND: There is little empirical evidence with respect to the implementation (adherence) of occupational health and safety guidelines in Germany. Recommendations for the prevention of SARS-CoV­2 infections in hairdressing services were provided by the German Statutory Accident Insurance for the Health and Welfare Services (BGW) in an occupational health and safety (OHS) standard in spring 2020. RESEARCH QUESTION: To what extent are the recommendations adhered to in this service profession as judged by hairdresser's customers after their visits? MATERIAL AND METHODS: The survey was conducted as a covert participant observational study between the beginning of October and the middle of December 2020 as a non-systematic opportunistic sample in three cities. The standardized checklist included three domains: a) measures of general, mainly technical nature, b) in contact with the customer and c) on an individual level for infection prevention.The results on domain and overall level were summarized in a standardized sum index (0-1) of SARS-CoV­2 OHS standard adherence. Nonparametric Wilcoxon tests were used to examine possible differences among the three subindices. RESULTS: The overall adherence index of 162 observations was 0.75 (SD 0.14). The two subindices on infection prevention in contact with the customer (e.g. indications for behavior rules) and on the individual level (e.g. wearing a mouth-nose covering) were significantly better than the one on general measures (e.g., hand cleaning possibility for customers). DISCUSSION: The observed adherence for prevention of SARS-CoV-2-infections in hairdresser salons was higher than experiences of the BGW on OHS adherence suggest. This might be explained by the general public awareness of risks of infection. The results on the adherence are only slightly lower than those resulting from around 400 standardized personal surveys of the BGW prevention services. LIMITATIONS: Given the non-systematic opportunistic sample, a (positive) bias in the adherence results cannot be excluded.

Mental Health Applications for Primary and Secondary Prevention of Common Mental Disorders: Attitudes of German Employees.

Background: Web-based and mobile mental health applications for the prevention and treatment of common mental disorders (CMDs) are on the rise. Under certain circumstances they have proved to be effective for a range of conditions (e.g., depression). Objective: There is not sufficient evidence regarding the benefits and barriers especially for mobile phone apps and for programs in the field of primary prevention. Studies on the acceptance of potential users of mental health apps yielded mixed outcomes. In a large survey we investigated the attitudes of employees toward mental health apps and various traditional mental health services. Our main research question in this contribution focuses on the acceptance of apps compared to other measures and the moderating influence of individual characteristics. Methods: The standardized survey was completed by members of an online access panel with different job types. A set of 33 self-developed items, including three questions on e-health, captured the perceived relevance of prevention at the (A) occupational, (B) individual, and (C) societal level. On the basis of an exploratory factor analysis, mean scores for mapping seven (sub-)dimensions were constructed and compared using the Wilcoxon test. The influence of potential predictors was analyzed in linear regression models. Results: The data of 610 respondents were analyzed (response rate 75%). Support from mental health applications was rated significantly less important compared to all other dimensions at the levels (A) to (C). Respondents were more likely to use mental health apps if they felt literate with electronic devices, perceived a high relevance of work-related demands as causal factors for CMDs, stated they would be ashamed of having a CMD, and would be willing to begin psychotherapy if recommended. Discussion and Conclusions: The results confirm the critical attitudes of potential mental health app users found in other studies. Since users with a negative attitude toward e-health might have a higher risk for dropout and non-adherence as well as lower intervention effects, well-designed educational strategies should be carried out beforehand.

Can Motivational Interviewing Make a Difference in Supporting Employees to Deal with Elevated Blood Pressure? A Feasibility Study at the Workplace.

Background: To overcome the problem of a high prevalence of undiscovered or untreated arterial hypertension in people of working age, the effects of behavioral change counseling in occupational health (OH) services should be investigated. The technique of motivational interviewing (MI) to support health-related lifestyle changes by physicians and/or occupational nurses ('health coach') has been shown to be successful in patients with chronic diseases. In 2010, we planned a randomized controlled trial (RCT) with employees who suffer from mild arterial hypertension. A preliminary feasibility study was performed in a large manufacturing company in Germany. Methods: All employees with elevated blood pressure measured by the OH-service were invited to undergo validation by 30 self-measurements. Persons with validated elevated values and without medical treatment received either usual hypertension counseling (control group, CG) or intensified MI-counseling (intervention group, IG) by the occupational health physician. Subsequently, the IG received MI-support from the 'health coach' in four telephone counseling sessions. Assessed feasibility factors included organizational processes, the acceptance of the validation procedure and the MI-counseling, and as primary outcome for an RCT the extent to which participants made health-related changes to their lifestyles. Results: Initially, 299 individuals were included in Study Part A (screening). At the end of Study Part B (intervention), out of 34 participants with validated and non-treated mild hypertension, only 7 (IG) and 6 (CG) participants completed the intervention including documentation. The high drop-out rate was due to the frequent lack of willingness to perform the 30 self-measurements at home with their own equipment. Acceptance was little higher when we changed the method to two repeated measurements in the OH service. MI-counseling, especially by the health coach, was evaluated positively. Conclusions: Despite the promising counseling approach, the feasibility study showed that an RCT with previous screening in the operational setting can only be implemented with high financial and personnel effort to reach an appropriate number of subjects. This substantial result could only be achieved through this comprehensive feasibility study, which investigated all aspects of the planned future RCT.

[On Statistical Underreporting of Norovirus-Infections: Insights from Register Data of Two Local Public Health Authorities]. / Zur statistischen Untererfassung von Norovirus-Infektionen: Erkenntnisse aus Daten von zwei Gesundheitsämtern.

BACKGROUND: Only laboratory-confirmed norovirus (NoV) cases have to be notified to the Robert Koch Institute (RKI) since 2011, but not other, e. g. clinical-epidemiological cases. It can be assumed that the extent of underreporting of NoV cases in Germany has significantly increased since then. OBJECTIVES: To discuss the extent of underreporting, we wanted to find out how many laboratory tests were carried out during gastroenteritis outbreaks. Furthermore, the significance of NoV outbreaks in occupational health is discussed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Of all pseudonymized gastroenteritis outbreak data reported to 2 local health authorities between 2011 and 2015, the proportion of NoV outbreaks and reported cases of infection among employees in hospitals and community facilities (nursing homes for the elderly, day-care centers, schools) confirmed by laboratory tests was calculated retrospectively. RESULTS: Only a few gastroenteritis outbreaks in day-care centers were etiologically diagnosed, so that only 6% and less could be classified as NoV outbreaks. In nursing homes for the elderly, about half of the outbreaks were classified as NoV, in hospitals almost all of them. Employees accounted for up to 23% of those affected in NoV outbreaks. CONCLUSIONS: The low level of laboratory diagnostics carried out during gastroenteritis outbreaks in day-care centers suggests a considerable number of hidden NoV cases. The significant proportion of staff relative to the total number of infected persons during the outbreaks highlights the importance of the burden of NoV outbreaks as a topic in occupational health. Further, large-scale prospective studies are needed to empirically substantiate these initial findings.

Significance of norovirus in occupational health: a review of published norovirus outbreaks in Central and Northern Europe.

OBJECTIVES: Globally, norovirus (NoV) is the leading cause of gastroenteritis infection among all ages. The development of prevention strategies in the field of occupational health requires a detailed knowledge about the impact of the disease on employees. This review article aims not only at evaluating the burden of NoV outbreaks on staff but also at discussing implications for future prevention strategies. METHODS: Published NoV outbreaks in Central and Northern Europe were identified via a systematic literature search. Additionally, published NoV outbreaks in Germany were detected via a manual literature search. Key epidemiological data, as the number of symptomatic staff, was then extracted. The proportion of affected employees was calculated for each dataset (single NoV outbreaks or aggregated data of multiple outbreaks). RESULTS: Overall, 116 datasets were extracted from 72 relevant articles. 144,852 persons were affected by NoV gastroenteritis, 25,408 out of them (17.5%) were employees. 23,874 (94.0%) of them fell sick during outbreaks in hospitals and related settings. NoV cases among personnel in food establishments were reported only sporadically (mean ratio: 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Employees in hospitals and community facilities seem quantitatively to be most vulnerable towards NoV epidemics. Therefore, high quality of prevention measures in these settings, respective compliance with prevention strategies should have the highest priority. The disease can be considered as an occupational disease, even regularly without long-term consequences. Following work safety rules, a vaccination for vulnerable groups should be recommended if the vaccine development turns out to be successful.

Challenges in Infection Epidemiology: On the Underreporting of Norovirus Gastroenteritis Cases in Germany.

It is commonly accepted that the number of officially reported incidences of norovirus (NoV) according to the German Protection against Infection Act (Infektionsschutzgesetz) does not reflect the 'true' incidence of NoV in Germany. This study aims to reveal the reasons for the underreporting of NoV cases by comparing secondary data. METHODS: NoV incidence (cases per 100,000 reference persons) in the age group 18-65 was derived from register data of four different sources in the German public health system (2011-2015): Statutory health insurance in the federal state of Lower Saxony (AOK; in- and outpatient cases), the Research Institute of Ambulatory Health Care in Germany (ZI; outpatient cases), the German Federal Statistical Office (inpatient cases; DESTATIS), and the Robert Koch Institute (RKI SurvStat; health reporting data). RESULTS: the incidence derived from the AOK in Lower Saxony varied between 49 and 66 NoV cases per 100,000 persons and was thus lower than at the federal level. Incidences of all inpatient and outpatient data were lower than the incidence according to the RKI in the last 2-3 years of the observation period. CONCLUSIONS: the disagreement between NoV incidences calculated from secondary inpatient and outpatient data and the respective numbers published by the RKI can be regarded as an indication that not all NoV cases were reported to public health authorities. This might be due to missed cases during the notification procedure or misclassification of gastroenteritis cases by general practitioners. Considering the limitations associated with analyzing secondary data, the appropriateness of these assumptions should be verified in future studies.

Surgical Smoke-Hazard Perceptions and Protective Measures in German Operating Rooms.

(1) Background: Hazardous substances in surgical smoke that is generated during laser or electrosurgery pose a potential health hazard. In Germany, the Technical Rules for Hazardous Substances (TRGS 525) have included recommendations for appropriate protective measures since 2014. Up to now, no empirical data has been available on the extent to which recommendations have been implemented in practice. (2) Methods: In 2018, 7089 surgeons in hospitals and outpatient practices were invited by email to participate in an online survey. In addition, 219 technical assistants were interviewed. The questionnaire dealt with knowledge of, and attitudes toward, the hazard potential of surgical smoke, as well as the availability and actual use of protective measures. Furthermore, manufacturers and distributors of smoke extraction devices were asked to give their assessment of the development of prevention in recent years. (3) Results: The survey response rate was 5% (surgeons) and 65% (technical assistant staff). Half of all surgeons assumed that there were high health hazards of surgical smoke without taking protective measures. Operating room nurses were more often concerned (88%). Only a few felt properly informed about the topic. The TRGS recommendations had been read by a minority of the respondents. In total, 52% of hospital respondents and 65% of the respondents in outpatient facilities reported any type of special suction system to capture surgical smoke. One-fifth of respondents from hospitals reported that technical measures had improved since the introduction of the TRGS 525. Fifty-one percent of the surgeons in hospitals and 70% of the surgeons in outpatient facilities "mostly" or "always" paid attention to avoiding surgical smoke. The most important reason for non-compliance with recommendations was a lack of problem awareness or thoughtlessness. Twelve industrial interviewees who assessed the situation and the development of prevention in practice largely confirmed the prevention gaps observed; only slight developments were observed in recent years. (4) Conclusions: The low response rate among surgeons and the survey results both indicate a major lack of interest and knowledge. Among other measures, team interventions with advanced training are needed in the future.

Who Should Play a Key Role in Preventing Common Mental Disorders that Affect Employees in the Workplace? Results of a Survey with Occupational Health Physicians, Primary Care Physicians, Psychotherapists, and Human Resource Managers.

The rising burden of common mental disorders (CMDs) in employees requires strategies for prevention. No systematic data exist about how those involved perceive their roles, responsibilities, and interactions with other professional groups. Therefore, we performed a multi-professional standardized survey with health professionals in Germany. A self-administered questionnaire was completed by 133 occupational health physicians (OHPs), 136 primary care physicians (PCPs), 186 psychotherapists (PTs), and 172 human resource managers (HRMs). Inter alia, they were asked which health professionals working in the company health service and in the outpatient care or in the sector of statutory insurance agents should play a key role in the primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention of CMDs in employees. The McNemar test was used in order to compare the attributed roles among the professionals involved. With regard to CMDs, all the professional groups involved in this study declared OHPs as the most relevant pillar in the field of prevention. In primary prevention, HRMs regarded themselves, OHPs, and health insurance agents as equally relevant in terms of prevention. PTs indicated an important role for employee representatives in this field. In secondary prevention, PCPs were regarded as important as OHPs. HRMs indicated themselves as equally important as OHPs and PCPs. In tertiary prevention, only OHPs identified themselves as main protagonists. The other groups marked a variety of several professions. There is a common acceptance from the parties involved that might help the first steps be taken toward overcoming barriers, e.g., by developing a common framework for quality-assured intersectional cooperation in the field of CMD prevention in employees.

Common mental disorders through the eyes of German employees: attributed relevance of work-related causes and prevention measures assessed by a standardised survey.

PURPOSE: Common mental disorders (CMDs) are becoming increasingly relevant in the working world. Numbers of risk factors have been confirmed by mostly correlative cross-sectional studies. Comprehensive and effective prevention is urgently needed. There is little knowledge about employees' own perceptions on causes of CMDs and prevention measures. Therefore, a survey was conducted in 2016. METHODS: A standardised instrument was developed for an online survey in a commercial access panel, targeted employees in different job types. We assessed two outcomes: perceived relevance of (1) work-related demands to the development of CMDs, and (2) prevention approaches in the workplace and on individual and societal levels. Possible predictive aspects were analysed exploratively by multivariate linear regression analysis. RESULTS: The response rate was 75% (n = 610). Job types were categorised as "blue", "grey" and "white-collar" workers (n = 193, 169, 248). The majority of respondents rated both outcomes consistently as "quite" or "very relevant"; societal prevention strategies were more relevant for non-white-collar workers. Perceived relevance of individual predisposition to develop a CMD was the strongest predictor for both outcomes, indicating the perception that people with higher personal vulnerability might suffer a higher strain from work-related risk factors than others. CONCLUSION: We assume that participants in our survey judged the relevance of work-related causes of CMDs independently of their own workload. The perceived relevance of prevention measures in different areas is consistent with official guidelines. A possible selection bias due to characteristics of access panel collectives and own direct or indirect experiences with CMD should be critically questioned.

Assessment of Patient and Occupational Safety Culture in Hospitals: Development of a Questionnaire with Comparable Dimensions and Results of a Feasibility Study in a German University Hospital.

(1) Background: Both patient and occupational safety cultures should be considered when promoting safety culture. To our knowledge, there are no studies that capture patient safety culture (PSC) and occupational safety culture (OSC) in hospitals while using a common questionnaire. The aim of this feasibility study in a German university hospital was to develop a questionnaire to assess both issues analogously. In addition to feasibility outcomes, we report results of PSC-OSC comparisons. (2) Methods: To assess PSC, we used the existing Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture (HSPSC) questionnaire. Developing new OSC "twin items" for certain parts of the HSPSC was supported by a previous literature review. Additionally, we developed multiple choice questions to examine knowledge and competencies regarding specific PS/OS aspects. (3) Results: Developing and implementing a combined PSC and OSC assessment instrument was feasible. The overall response rate was 33% (407 nurses, 140 physicians). In general, the statistical reliability of almost all scales was sufficient. Positive PSC perceptions (agreement rates 46⁻87%) were found in 16 out of 18 scales. Of the four twin scales, the PSC values were significantly better. Individual PS- and OS-related knowledge and competencies were lower than expected. (4) Conclusion: The comparative investigation of patient and occupational safety in a large hospital is a promising approach and can be recommended for further studies. We used our experiences that are presented here in an ongoing bicentric study on the associations between working conditions, occupational safety culture, patient safety culture, and patient safety outcomes (WorkSafeMed).

The Role of Work-Related Factors in the Development of Psychological Distress and Associated Mental Disorders: Differential Views of Human Resource Managers, Occupational Physicians, Primary Care Physicians and Psychotherapists in Germany.

Objectives: This study analyses the perceived relevance of stress-dimensions in work-settings from the differential views of Human Resource Managers (HRM), Occupational Physicians (OP), Primary Care Physicians (PCP) and Psychotherapists (PT) in Germany. Methods: Cross-sectional study design, using a self-report questionnaire. Descriptive measures and explorative bivariate methods were applied for group-comparisons. Results are presented as rankings of perceived importance and as polarity profiles of contrasting views. Results: N = 627 participants completed the questionnaires (HRM: n = 172; OP: n = 133; PCP: n = 136; PT: n = 186). The stress dimensions with the highest mean ratings across all four professions were: 'social relationships in the work place' (M = 3.55, SD = 0.62) and 'superiors´ leadership style' (M = 3.54, SD = 0.64). Mean ratings of perceived relevance of stress dimensions differed most between HRM and the three medical professions. Conclusions: The perceived importance of work-related stress-dimensions seems to be higher in the medical disciplines (OP, PCP, PT) than in the group from the management sector (HRM). However, no fundamental disagreement on the role of work-related stress-dimensions seems to hinder e.g., intensified efforts of cooperation across sectors in tackling the "stress-pandemic" and improving the (mental) health of employees.

Prevention of Common Mental Disorders in Employees. Perspectives on Collaboration from Three Health Care Professions.

Collaboration among occupational health physicians, primary care physicians and psychotherapists in the prevention and treatment of common mental disorders in employees has been scarcely researched. To identify potential for improvement, these professions were surveyed in Baden-Württemberg (Germany). Four hundred and fifty occupational health physicians, 1000 primary care physicians and 700 resident medical and psychological psychotherapists received a standardized questionnaire about their experiences, attitudes and wishes regarding activities for primary, secondary and tertiary prevention of common mental disorders in employees. The response rate of the questionnaire was 30% (n = 133) among occupational health physicians, 14% (n = 136) among primary care physicians and 27% (n = 186) among psychotherapists. Forty percent of primary care physicians and 33% of psychotherapists had never had contact with an occupational health physician. Psychotherapists indicated more frequent contact with primary care physicians than vice versa (73% and 49%, respectively). Better cooperation and profession-specific training on mental disorders and better knowledge about work-related stress were endorsed. For potentially involved stakeholders, the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration for better prevention and care of employees with common mental disorders is very high. Nevertheless, there is only little collaboration in practice. To establish quality-assured cooperation structures in practice, participants need applicable frameworks on an organizational and legal level.

[Glove Disinfection: Knowledge, Experiences and Attitudes of Hygiene Team Members and Company Physicians]. / Zur Desinfektion von Handschuhen: Wissen, Erfahrungen und Einstellungen von Mitgliedern des Hygieneteams und Betriebsärzten.

BACKGROUND: Chemical-resistant single-use gloves allow the practice of glove disinfection. However, there are different recommendations for their use. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a standardized survey during an infection control meeting and an occupational health symposium in order to gain data on knowledge, experiences and attitudes of hygiene team members and occupational health physicians in hospitals with regard to glove disinfection by group comparison. RESULTS: 558 out of 1000 questionnaires were returned, among them 246 (44.1%) from infection control practitioners, 63 (11.3%) from link-nurses, 39 (7.0%) from hospital epidemiologists, 97 (17.4%) from link-physicians, and 46 (8.2%) from occupational health physicians. The remaining 67 participants worked in multiple other areas. 75% of infection control professionals, 35% of occupational health physicians and 25% of nurses and physicians were contacted regarding glove disinfection within the last 12 months. In many institutions, glove disinfection is not allowed; 67% of respondents voted against it. Large deficits regarding disposable gloves were reported. CONCLUSION: The topic of glove disinfection is primarily an issue for the infection control team. However, a close cooperation with occupational health physicians is warranted but is not practiced. There is relevant uncertainty regarding the presupposition of disinfectable gloves and the practical utilization of glove disinfection.