Evaluation of health worker acceptance and tolerance of respirators in clinical practice-An Australian perspective.

BACKGROUND: One of the main infection prevention and control measures introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic was the focused application of respiratory protection to ensure health worker safety and the effective use of personal protective equipment. However, user acceptance of these strategies is paramount in sustainable compliance. This study explores various aspects of respirator use and provides recommendations to improve and maximize health worker safety. The aim of this study was to understand the relationship between respirator (P2/N95) comfort and user experience toward respiratory protection. The aim of this study was to understand the relationship between respirator (P2/N95) comfort and user experience toward respiratory protection. METHODS: The nonexperimental cross-sectional design study was conducted in New South Wales, Australia between November and December 2022 using an anonymous self-administered online questionnaire in Microsoft Forms. RESULTS: Of 2,514 respondents, 65% reported to have used a respirator every working day with only a few using a respirator once weekly or less (9%). Almost all respondents had completed at least one quantitative fit test (96%) prior to the survey. Fifty-nine percent reported to have experienced discomfort from wearing a respirator and the most reported adverse effect was difficulty communicating (64%), followed by skin irritation or acne (62%) and headache (56%). CONCLUSIONS: Despite somewhat less favorable ratings on comfort and communication, health workers are in favor of respiratory protection. However, a focus on tolerance of respirators and strategies to address adverse effects from prolonged respirator use must be considered when implementing policies and procedures. Moreover, resources must be allocated to improve the design, breathability, and sustainability of a respirator along with education and training on how to use respiratory protection safely and effectively.

Practice development amidst a pandemic: a pilot programme to develop leadership in infection prevention and control professionals.

PURPOSE: This paper aims to describe the design and evaluation of a pilot leadership development programme for infection prevention and control (IPAC) professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic. The programme's aim was to improve IPAC knowledge and capacity in the health-care system by developing the leadership skills and capacities of novice and advanced Infection Control Professionals (ICPs), to respond flexibly, and competently, in their expanding and ever-changing roles. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: The leadership programme was piloted with seven nurses, who were part of a clinical nursing team in New South Wales, Australia, over a 12-month period between 2021 and 2022. The programme was designed using a leadership development framework underpinned by transformational leadership theory, practice development approaches and collaborative and experiential learning. These principles were applied during programme design, with components adapted to learners' interests and regular opportunities provided for collaboration in active learning and critical reflection on workplace experiences. FINDINGS: The authors' evaluation suggests that the programme was feasible, acceptable and considered to be effective by this cohort. Moreover, participants valued the opportunities to engage in active and experience-based learning with peers, and with the support of senior and experienced ICPs. The action learning sets were well-received and allowed participants to critically reflect on and learn from one another's experiences. The mentoring programme allowed them to apply their developing leadership skills to real workplace challenges that they face. RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS: Despite a small sample size, the authors' results provide empirical evidence about the effectiveness of using a practice development approach for strengthening ICP leadership capacity. The success of this pilot study has paved the way for a bigger second cohort of participants in the programme, for which further evaluation will be conducted. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: The success of this leadership programme reflects both the need for leadership development in the IPAC professions and the applicability of this approach, with appropriate facilitation, for other professions and organizations. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: ICP leadership programmes have not been previously reported in the literature. This pilot study builds on the growing interest in IPAC leadership to foster health system responsiveness and change.

Preparing for the Next Pandemic: An After-Action Review of Infection Prevention and Control Audit Strategies Within Airport and Hotel Quarantine Program.

BACKGROUND: Effective infection prevention and control (IPAC) practices within the New South Wales (NSW) Airport Operations and Hotel Quarantine Program (Quarantine Program) were required to mitigate the risk of COVID-19 being transmitted to staff, other guests, contractors, and the community. METHOD: The Quarantine Program relied on complex logistical arrangements and an end-to-end process that included all steps from the time travelers boarded the returning flight until completion of the quarantine period. This required compliance with relevant IPAC standards historically reserved for health care and the implementation of a quality assurance audit framework. RESULTS: The Clinical Excellence Commission (CEC) as the NSW Health Pillar for quality and safety and the lead in IPAC provided training and resources coupled with an IPAC quality audit framework after program commencement. CONCLUSION: This approach ensured a clear governance structure and a regular review process to minimize risk and support continuous improvement within the program.

Implementation of a successful infection prevention and control governance structure and capacity building strategies during COVID-19 pandemic - A brief report.

An analysis of the Clinical Excellence Commissions response to COVID-19 prevention and protection measures identified the need to build on the existing governance process to achieve a more structured and methodical approach. The infection prevention and control measures and strategies implemented within health and nonhealth care, proved to be effective and sustainable with the ability to build additional clinician capacity even during an ongoing pandemic.

Implementation of a respiratory protection program within healthcare facilities during the COVID-19 pandemic- lessons learned.

The use of fit tested respirators in the workplace is required to protect health workers against airborne pathogens. The COVID-19 pandemic required rapid upscaling of fit testing which was achieved using the framework of a respiratory protection program. Implementing and sustaining such a program in the midst of a pandemic was challenging and required clear direction from a lead agency combined with stakeholder engagement.

Modified glove use for contact precautions: Health care workers' perceptions and acceptance.

BACKGROUND: Patients colonized or infected with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and or vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus are placed under contact precautions. Contact precautions require patients to be placed in single rooms and their health care workers (HCWs) to wear gowns, aprons and gloves on entry and doffing on exit. Glove use is widely accepted to be associated with poor hand hygiene compliance. We trailed the removal of gloves for contact precautions for contacts not expected to involve body fluids to improve hand hygiene between multiple contacts of the patient and patient zone. METHODS: We have conducted a 5 phase study of the removal of gloves for contacts without body fluids in 250 HCWs using pretrial focus groups (N = 12), hand microbiology (N = 40) (reported elsewhere), development of a modified contact precautions poster, trial of modified poster (n = 100), posttrial focus group discussion (n = 22), and a survey of HCWs postrollout in additional locations (n = 76). RESULTS: Pretrial focus groups identified 4 themes, and the leading theme identified as the facilitator for glove use as self-protection. HCWs viewed current contact precaution guidelines as preventing them from making their own judgement regarding the need for gloving for patient contacts, leading continuous glove use without changing gloves between multiple contacts. Participants believed that the trial empowered them to make their own clinical judgment for gloves and to consciously use hand hygiene between dry (no body fluid) contacts. Four themes were discussed during the posttrial focus groups and although self-protection remained the central theme, hand hygiene replaced glove use. Participants spoke of an appreciation of and increased trust in hand hygiene during nonglove use for dry contacts. The survey responses from additional sites were mostly positive for the safety of nonglove use for dry contacts, it improved hand hygiene and that the adoption of the modified guidelines was empowering. CONCLUSIONS: The trial of nonglove use for expected dry contact, while caring for patients under contact precautions for methicillin-resistant S aureus and or vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus, was successful in refocusing HCWs reliance on hand hygiene for self-protection. Mandatory glove use for contact precautions was believed to contribute to their failure to change gloves between procedures on the same patient and patient zone, with HCWs now recognizing multiple contacts with the same gloves as a risk for contamination.

Safe removal of gloves from contact precautions: The role of hand hygiene.

BACKGROUND: Routine hand hygiene effectively removes methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and/or vancomycin resistant Enterococcus (VRE) from the ungloved hands of healthcare workers (HCWs) who are caring for patients under contact precautions, when exposure to bodily fluids is not expected. METHODS: HCWs' ungloved hands were cultured after hand hygiene with alcohol-based hand rub (ABHR) or soap-and-water wash after routine clinical care of patients known to be colonized or infected with MRSA or VRE. RESULTS: Two hundred forty samples from 40 HCWs were tested and found to be culture negative for either MRSA or VRE after contact with patients when 3 pumps of ABHR (0/80) or plain soap-and-water wash (0/80) were used. No VRE was observed in any of the 120 samples collected. Two plates (2/40) grew 1 colony-forming unit of MRSA after 2 pumps of ABHR. Two HCWs with positive plates were cultured negative on retesting. CONCLUSION: We showed that appropriate hand hygiene was effective in removing MRSA and VRE even when gloves were not used for routine clinical care, despite contact with patients known to be colonized with MRSA or VRE. A modified approach to glove use for dry contact with patients on contact precautions might improve patient safety within healthcare settings.

Reflection on observation: A qualitative study using practice development methods to explore the experience of being a hand hygiene auditor in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Within the Australian public health care system, an observation model is used to assess hand hygiene practice in health care workers, culminating in a publicly available healthcare service performance indicator. The intent of this study was for the results to inform the development of a strategy to support individual auditors and local sustainability of the hand hygiene auditing program. METHOD: This qualitative study used a values clarification tool to gain an understanding of the experiences of hand hygiene auditors. The methodology involved qualitative interpretation of focus group discussions to identify the enablers and barriers to successful performance of the auditors' role. RESULTS: Twenty-five participants identified congruous themes of the need for peer and managerial support, improved communication and feedback, and consideration for succession planning. There was consistency in the participants' most frequently identified significant barriers in undertaking the role. CONCLUSION: Hand hygiene auditors take pride in their role and work toward the goal of reducing health care-associated infections by having a part to play in improving hand hygiene practices of all staff members. Important themes, barriers, and enablers were identified in this study. This research will be of interest nationally and globally, considering the dearth of published information on the experience of hand hygiene auditors. This study provides evidence of the need to support individual hand hygiene auditors.