ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the effect of a tailored, multifaceted improvement strategy on hand hygiene compliance in long-term care facilities (LTCFs). We also performed a process evaluation to explore the mechanisms through which our strategy brought about change. DESIGN: We conducted a stepped-wedge cluster-randomized controlled trial with a sequential rollout of the improvement strategy to all participating LTCFs. The strategy consisted of education, training, reminders, observation sessions (including feedback), and team meetings (including feedback). SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The study included nursing professionals from 14 LTCFs (23 wards) in the Netherlands. METHODS: Hand hygiene compliance was observed during 5 measurement periods using WHO's "Five Moments for Hand Hygiene." Multilevel analyses and corresponding tests were completed on an intention-to-treat basis. RESULTS: The absolute intervention effect of overall hand hygiene compliance (primary outcome measure) was 13% (95% CI 9.3-16.7, P < .001), adjusted for time and clustering. The adjusted absolute effect was 23% (95% CI 7-39, P < .002) before a clean and aseptic procedure, 18% (95% CI 10-26, P < .001) after touching a resident, 14% (95% CI 7-22, P < .003) before touching a resident, 10% (95% CI 5-15, P < .001) after contact with body fluid, and 1% (95% CI -11 to 13, P = .8) after touching a resident's surroundings. With the exception of leadership, participants at LTCFs with more exposure to the intervention components showed statistically significantly more improvement than those at facilities with lower exposure scores. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Our strategy was successful in improving hand hygiene compliance. LTCFs with more team members exposed to the different intervention components, demonstrated a greater effect from the intervention. To strengthen the impact of our intervention, we recommend that future improvement strategies provide more support to managers to ensure they are better equipped to take on their leadership roles and enable their teams to improve and maintain hand hygiene compliance.
Subject(s)
Cross Infection , Hand Hygiene , Humans , Hand Hygiene/methods , Hand Disinfection/methods , Long-Term Care , Guideline AdherenceABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The PEDI-CAT measures daily functioning of children and youth, aged 1 to 21 years, with a variety of physical, cognitive and/or behavioral disabilities. In order to use an instrument in another culture or language, translation and cross-cultural validation are important, particularly for end-users. This study describes the process of translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the Dutch version of the PEDI-CAT. METHODS: End-users were involved in all steps. First, the PEDI-CAT items were reviewed to determine whether the items were relevant and acceptable in the Dutch culture. Then, the PEDI-CAT was translated into Dutch using specific guidelines. Finally, the wording of the Dutch items and response options were reviewed and tested with 22 parents of children and adolescents with and without disabilities. RESULTS: All 267 items and response options of the original PEDI-CAT were assessed as relevant and translated into Dutch. A selection of 175 items was tested with Think Aloud interviews which revealed that the translation of 46 items could be improved. CONCLUSION: The role of end-users in the process of translation and cross-cultural adaptation was crucial. This collaborative process resulted in a Dutch version of the PEDI-CAT that has been optimally adapted to the Dutch language and culture.
Subject(s)
Activities of Daily Living , Disability Evaluation , Disabled Children , Parents/psychology , Adolescent , Adult , Behavioral Symptoms/diagnosis , Child , Cognition , Culture , Disabled Children/psychology , Disabled Children/rehabilitation , Female , Humans , Male , Netherlands , Physical Functional Performance , Rehabilitation Research , Reproducibility of Results , TranslationsABSTRACT
The use of computers in education in general and in medical education in particular is nowadays well established, but the use of computer-based assessment (CBA) in higher education lags behind. In this article we explore the reasons for this situation and provide tips for teachers to guide the introduction of CBA, based on our experiences. Attention is given to benefits and drawbacks of CBA hardware solutions, the choice of software, types of test questions, security, instructing students and teachers and evaluation.
