Search

Item does not contain fulltext BACKGROUND: Improving hand hygiene compliance is still a major challenge for most hospitals. Innovative approaches are needed. OBJECTIVE: We tested whether an innovative, theory based, team and leaders-directed strategy would be more effective in increasing hand hygiene compliance rates in nurses than a literature based state-of-the-art strategy. DESIGN AND SETTING: A cluster randomised controlled trial called HELPING HANDS was conducted in 67 nursing wards of three hospitals in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: All affiliated nurses of the nursing wards. Wards were randomly assigned to either the team and leaders-directed strategy (30 wards) or the state-of-the-art strategy (37 wards). METHODS: The control arm received a state-of-the-art strategy including education, reminders, feedback and targeting adequate products and facilities. The experimental group received all elements of the state-of-the-art strategy supplemented with interventions based on social influence and leadership, comprising specific team and leaders-directed activities. Strategies were delivered during a period of six months. We monitored nurses' HH compliance during routine patient care before and directly after strategy delivery, as well as six months later. Secondary outcomes were compliance with each type of hand hygiene opportunity, the presence of jewellery and whether the nurses wore long-sleeved clothes. The effects were evaluated on an intention-to-treat basis by comparing the post-strategy hand hygiene compliance rates with the baseline rates. Multilevel analysis was applied to compensate for the clustered nature of the data using mixed linear modelling techniques. RESULTS: During the study, we observed 10,785 opportunities for appropriate hand hygiene in 2733 nurses. The compliance in the state-of-the-art group increased from 23% to 42% in the short term and to 46% in the long run. The hand hygiene compliance in the team and leaders-directed group improved from 20% to 53% in the short term and remained 53% in the long run. The difference between both strategies showed an Odds Ratio of 1.64 (95% CI 1.33-2.02) in favour of the team and leaders-directed strategy. CONCLUSIONS: Our results support the added value of social influence and enhanced leadership in hand hygiene improvement strategies. The methodology of the latter also seems promising for improving team performance with other patient safety issues. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov [NCT00548015].

Item does not contain fulltext BACKGROUND: Many strategies have been designed and evaluated to address poor hand hygiene compliance. Unfortunately, well-designed economic evaluations of hand hygiene improvement strategies are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To compare the cost-effectiveness of two successful implementation strategies for improving nurses' hand hygiene compliance and reducing hospital acquired infections (HAI's). DESIGN AND SETTING: A cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a cluster randomised controlled trial was conducted in 67 nursing wards of three hospitals in the Netherlands. The evaluation used a hospital perspective. PARTICIPANTS: All affiliated nurses of the nursing wards. Wards were randomly assigned to either the control group (n=30) or the experimental group (n=37). METHODS: The control group received a state-of-the-art strategy including education, reminders feedback and optimising materials and facilities. The experimental group received a team and leaders-directed strategy which included all elements of the state-of-the-art strategy supplemented with interventions aimed at the social context of teams and enhancing leadership. The most efficient implementation strategy was determined by the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per extra percentage of hand hygiene compliance gained and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per additional percentage reduction in the HAI rate. Bootstrap methods were used to determine confidence intervals for these incremental cost-effectiveness ratio's. Two scenarios of 15 and 30% were used to express the association between increased hand hygiene compliance and the reduction in HAIs. RESULTS: The team and leaders-directed strategy was significantly more effective in improving hand hygiene compliance. The mean difference effect was 8.91% (95% CI, 0.75-17.06). This extra increase was achieved at an average cost of euro5497 per ward. The incremental cost per extra percentage of hand hygiene gained on ward level was euro622. The incremental cost per additional percentage reduction in the HAI rate on ward level was euro2074 (30% scenario) and euro4125 (15% scenario). Within the 30% scenario, there is a probability of 90% that the team and leaders-directed strategy is cost-effective and within the 15% scenario, there is a probability of 70% that the team and leaders-directed strategy is cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: Optimising hand hygiene compliance through a team and leaders-directed strategy is cost-effective as compared to a state-of-the-art strategy.

Item does not contain fulltext