Improving Hand Hygiene Adherence in Healthcare Workers Before Patient Contact: A Multimodal Intervention in Four Tertiary Care Hospitals in Japan
OBJECTIVES: Our objectives were to evaluate hand hygiene adherence among physicians and nurses before touching hospitalized patients and to evaluate changes in hand hygiene adherence after a multimodal intervention was implemented.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We conducted a pre- and postintervention study with HCWs at four tertiary hospitals in Niigata, Japan. Hand hygiene observations were conducted from June to August 2018 (preintervention) and February to March 2019 (postintervention).
INTERVENTION: The multimodal hand hygiene intervention recommended by the World Health Organization was tailored to each hospital and implemented from September 2018 to February 2019.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: We observed hand hygiene adherence before touching patients in each hospital and compared rates before and after intervention. Intervention components were also evaluated.
RESULTS: There were 2,018 patient observations preintervention and 1,630 postintervention. Overall, hand hygiene adherence improved from 453 of 2,018 preintervention observations (22.4%) to 548 of 1,630 postintervention observations (33.6%; P < .001). Rates improved more among nurses (13.9 percentage points) than among doctors (5.7 percentage points). Improvement varied among the hospitals: Hospital B (18.4 percentage points) was highest, followed by Hospitals D (11.4 percentage points), C (11.3 percentage points), and Hospital A (6.5 percentage points).
CONCLUSIONS: A multimodal intervention improved hand hygiene adherence rates in physicians and nurses in Niigata, Japan; however, further improvement is necessary. Given the current suboptimal hand hygiene adherence rates in Japanese hospitals, the spread of COVID-19 within the hospital setting is a concern.
© 2020 Society of Hospital Medicine
Statistical Analysis
Overall hand hygiene adherence rates from the pre- and postintervention periods were compared based on hospitals and HCW subgroups. The Pearson’s chi-square test was used for the comparison of hand hygiene adherence rates between pre- and postintervention periods, and 95% CIs were estimated using binomial distribution. Poisson regression was used to look at changes in hand hygiene adherence with adjustment for HCW type. A two-tailed P value of <.05 was considered statistically significant. The study protocol was reviewed and approved by the ethics committees at all participating hospitals.
RESULTS
Overall Changes
In total, there were 2,018 and 1,630 observations of hand hygiene during the preintervention and postintervention periods, respectively. Most observations were of nurses: 1,643 of the 2,018 preintervention observations (81.4%) and 1,245 of the 1,630 postintervention observations (76.4%).
Findings from the HCW observations are summarized in Figure A. The overall postintervention hand hygiene adherence rate (548 of 1,630 observations; 33.6%; 95% CI, 31.3%-35.9%) was significantly higher than the preintervention rate (453 of 2,018 observations; 22.4%; 95% CI, 20.6%-24.3%; P < .001). This finding persisted after adjustment for the type of HCW (nurse vs physician), with proper hand hygiene adherence occurring 1.55 times more often after the intervention than before (95% CI, 1.37-1.76; P < .001). The overall improvement in hand hygiene adherence rates in the postintervention period was seen in all four hospitals (Figure B). However, the hand hygiene adherence rates of nurses in Hospitals C and D were lower than those in Hospitals A and B both before and after the intervention.
Use of AHR was the dominant appropriate hand hygiene practice vs hand washing with soap and water. Of those that practiced appropriate hand hygiene, the rate of AHR use was high and unchanged between preintervention (424 of 453; 93.6%) and postintervention periods (513 of 548; 93.6%; P = .99).
Changes by HCW Type
The rates of hand hygiene adherence in both physicians and nurses were higher in the postintervention period than in the preintervention period. However, the improvement of hand hygiene adherence among nurses—from 415 of 1,643 (25.2%) to 487 of 1,245 (39.1%) for an increase of 13.9 percentage points (95% CI,10.4-17.3)—was greater than that in physicians—from 38 of 375 (10.1%) to 61 of 385 (15.8%) for an increase of 5.7 percentage points (95% CI, 1.0-8.1; P < .001; Figure B). In general, nurse hand hygiene adherence was higher than that in physicians both in the preintervention period, with nurses at 25.2% (95% CI, 23.2%-27.4%) vs physicians at 10.1% (95% CI, 7.1%-13.2%; P < .001), and in the postintervention period, with nurses at 39.1% (95% CI, 36.4%-41.8%) vs physicians at 15.8% (95% CI, 12.2%-19.5%; P < .001).
Changes by Hospital
Overall, improvement of hand hygiene adherence was observed in all hospitals. However, the improvement rates differed in each hospital: They were 6.5 percentage points in Hospital A, 11.3 percentage points in Hospital C, 11.4 percentage points in Hospital D, and 18.4 percentage points in Hospital B. Hospital B achieved the highest postintervention adherence rates (42.6%), along with the highest improvement. The improvements of hand hygiene adherence in physicians were higher in Hospitals B (8.4 percentage points) and D (8.3 percentage points) than they were in Hospitals A (4.1 percentage points) and C (4.0 percentage points).
