Search

The management of wounds by health professionals usually involves aseptic technique. An alternative is the use of clean techniques where the risk of infection is minimised but use of non-sterile materials is considered permissible. This systematic review and meta-analysis compares these two approaches. Nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Overall risk of bias was judged to be low. The random-effects relative risk of infection for clean dressings rather than aseptic dressings was 0.86 (95% CI 0.67, 1.12). There was little evidence of statistical heterogeneity, although the small number of infections in either group resulted in wide confidence intervals. The 95% prediction interval for future studies was 0.63, 1.18. There was therefore no evidence showing inferiority of clean techniques compared to aseptic methods. Before clinical studies are undertaken with higher risk procedures, laboratory simulations should explore safety by investigating the potential for pathogen transmission at each stage in the dressing procedure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To investigate the knowledge of university students regarding pandemic and seasonal influenza. Design: Online questionnaire-based survey of undergraduate and postgraduate students, including those on nursing, medical, other health and non-health related courses. Method: The sample was recruited using the university email system, and the survey was administered using SurveyMonkey. The questionnaire sought the following data: demographics; general knowledge; intentions with regards to vaccines, pharmacological and behavioural interventions; personal susceptibility and the symptoms of influenza; and the provision of information. Results: Approximately half (56 per cent) of respondents were on health-related courses. There was a good level of knowledge about influenza and its severity, and the importance of vaccination, although few intended actually receiving the seasonal or pandemic vaccines (23 per cent and 21 per cent respectively). However, in the event of a pandemic most students would still attend college (60 per cent) and almost half would still attend social events (47 per cent). Many thought that there had been hype by the government (44 per cent) and the media (89 per cent). Conclusions: There was a good level of knowledge about influenza, although this was not always reflected in intended behaviours with regards to vaccination and isolation. (Contains 3 tables.)

Hand hygiene is the cornerstone of infection prevention but is poorly undertaken and under-appreciated by medical, nursing, and other health care students. This systematic review aimed to identify and describe strategies used to teach the theory and practice of hand hygiene, determine impact on knowledge and practice, and identify need for future education and research. Ten studies met the criteria for review. Health care students' theoretical knowledge of hand hygiene and their ability to practise are suboptimal and should be improved before they have contact with vulnerable patients. Educational input can increase knowledge and practice but the methodological heterogeneity of the studies and lack of rigour make it impossible to determine which interventions are most likely to be successful. The literature provides little evidence upon which to base educational practice in this area. There is a need for multi-centred longitudinal studies to measure effectiveness of teaching methods over time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]