HCW visit 8 ID of ward ID of HCW
25. Importance and impact
873
Due to the exponential increase of antimicrobial resistance amongst bacterial pathogens, their transmission 874
in hospitals predominantly through HCWs hands, and due to the global burden of HAI worldwide, HH is 875
more important now than ever. In this regard, the quality of HH action is considered to be as relevant as 876
compliance. The device intended to be studied in the current proposal may improve both compliance and 877
quality of HH action in a continuous manner, and ultimately contribute to reduce HAI and antimicrobial 878
resistance spread in all type of health care settings, eventually helping to make hospitals a safer place to 879
be, as a patient or a HCW.
880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896
897
26. References
898 899
1. Allegranzi B, et al. Burden of endemic health-care-associated infection in developing countries:
900
systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2011 Jan 15;377(9761):228-41.
901
2. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Point prevalence survey of healthcare associated 902
infections and antimicrobial use in European acute care hospitals. Stockholm: ECDC; 2013.
903
Available at: http://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/publications/Publications/healthcare-associated-904
infections-antimicrobial-use-PPS.pdf 905
3. European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control: Annual Epidemiological Report on 906
Communicable Diseases in Europe 2008. Stockholm, European Centre for Disease Prevention and 907
Control, 2008. Available at: http://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/publications/Publications/
908
0812_SUR_Annual_Epidemiological_Report_2008.pdf 909
4. Office Fédéral de la Santé Publique. [Stratégie nationale de surveillance, de prévention et de lutte contre 910
les infections HAIes (stratégie NOSO): Foire aux questions], 2014.
911
5. Pittet D, et al. Evidence-based model for hand transmission during patient care and the role of improved 912
practices. Lancet Infect Dis 2006; 6: 641–652.
913
6. Pittet D, et al. Effectiveness of a hospital-wide programme to improve compliance with hand hygiene.
914
Lancet, 2000. 356: 1307-1312.
915
7. Pittet D, Compliance with hand disinfection and its impact on hospital-acquired infections. J Hosp 916
Infect, 2001. 48 (Suppl A): S40-6.
917
8. Ling ML, How KB. Impact of a hospital-wide hand hygiene promotion strategy on healthcare-918
associated infections. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control 2012;1:13.
919
9. Loveday HP, et al. epic3: national evidence-based guidelines for preventing healthcare-associated 920
infections in NHS hospitals in England. J Hosp Infect 2014;86(Suppl 1):S1-70.
921
10. Ellingson K, et al. Strategies to prevent healthcare-associated infections through hand hygiene. Infect 922
Control Hosp Epidemiol 2014;35:937-60.
923
11. Hugonnet S, et al. Alcohol-based handrub improves compliance with hand hygiene in intensive care 924
units. Arch Intern Med. 2002 May 13;162(9):1037-43.
925
12. WHO. WHO Guidelines on Hand Hygiene in Health Care, 2009, World Health Organization: Geneva.
926
Available at: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/44102/1/9789241597906_eng.pdf 927
13. WHO. Guide to Implementation: A Guide to the Implementation of the WHO Multimodal Hand 928
Hygiene Improvement Strategy, 2009. Available at:
929
http://whqlibdoc.who.int/hq/2009/WHO_IER_PSP_2009.02_eng.pdf 930
14. Sax H et al. The World Health Organization hand hygiene observation method. Am J Infect Control 931
2009;37:827-834.
932
15. Zahar JR. Is hand-rub consumption correlated with hand hygiene and rate of extended-spectrum beta-933
lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (ESBL-PE)-acquired infections? J Hosp Infect. 2012 934
Apr;80(4):348-50.
935
16. Vernaz N et al. Temporal effects of antibiotic use and hand rub consumption on the incidence of 936
MRSA and Clostridium difficile. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. (2008) 62 (3): 601-607.
937
17. Sax H et al. 'My five moments for hand hygiene': a user-centred design approach to understand, train, 938
monitor and report hand hygiene. J Hosp Infect. 2007 Sep;67(1):9-21.
939
18. Allegranzi B, et al. Status of the implementation of the World Health Organization multimodal hand 940
hygiene strategy in United States of America health care facilities. Am J Infect Control. 2014 941
Mar;42(3):224-30.
942
19. Salmon S, et al. Beginning the journey of hand hygiene compliance monitoring at a 2,100-bed tertiary 943
hospital in Vietnam. Am J Infect Control. 2014 Jan;42(1):71-73.
944
20. Allegranzi B, et al. Global implementation of WHO's multimodal strategy for improvement of hand 945
hygiene: a quasi-experimental study. Lancet Infect Dis. 2013 Oct;13(10):843-851.
946
21. Barrera L, et al. Effectiveness of a hand hygiene promotion strategy using alcohol-based handrub in 6 947
intensive care units in Colombia. Am J Infect Control. 2011 Oct;39(8):633-9.
948
22. Lee A, et al. Hand hygiene practices and adherence determinants in surgical wards across Europe and 949
Israel: a multicenter observational study. Am J Infect Control. 2011 Aug;39(6):517-520.
950
23. Mathai E, et al. Promoting hand hygiene in healthcare through national/subnational campaigns. J Hosp 951
Infect. 2011 Apr;77(4):294-298.
952
24. Stewardson A, et al. Quicker, easier, and cheaper? The promise of automated hand hygiene 953
monitoring. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2011 Oct;32(10):1029-1031.
954
25. Stewardson A, et al. Impact of observation and analysis methodology when reporting hand hygiene 955
data. J Hosp Infect. 2011 Apr;77(4):358-359.
956
dispensers for improving hand hygiene compliance. Am J Infect Control 2014;42(8):852-5.
960
28. Fakhry M, et al. Effectiveness of an audible reminder on hand hygiene adherence. Am J Infect Control
validation and a randomized controlled trial. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2013;34(9):919-28.
964
compliance at a medical intensive care unit. Am J Infect Control 2014;42(8):926-8.
968
32. Levchenko AI, et al. Automated monitoring: a potential solution for achieving sustainable 969
improvement in hand hygiene practices. Comput Inform Nurs 2014;32(8):397-403.
970
33. Muller MP, et al. Electronic monitoring of individual HCWs' hand hygiene event rate. Infect Control 971
Hosp Epidemiol 2014;35(9):1189-92.
972
34. Storey SJ, et al. Effect of a contact monitoring system with immediate visual feedback on hand 973
hygiene compliance. J Hosp Infect 2014.
974
35. Boudjema S, et al. MediHandTrace (R): a tool for measuring and understanding hand hygiene 975
adherence. Clin Microbiol Infect 2014;20(1):22-8.
976
36. Marra AR, et al. The use of real-time feedback via wireless technology to improve hand hygiene 977
compliance. Am J Infect Control 2014;42(6):608-11.
978
37. Ward MA, et al. Automated and electronically assisted hand hygiene monitoring systems: a systematic 979
review. Am J Infect Control 2014;42(5):472-8.
980
38. Davis CR. Infection-free surgery: how to improve hand-hygiene compliance and eradicate methicillin-981
resistant Staphylococcus aureus from surgical wards. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2010;92:316-9.
982
39. Armellino D, et al. Using high-technology to enforce low-technology safety measures: the use of 983
third-party remote video auditing and real-time feedback in healthcare. Clin Infect Dis 2012;54:1-7.
984
40. Armellino D, et al. Replicating changes in hand hygiene in a surgical intensive care unit with remote 985
video auditing and feedback. Am J Infect Control 2013;41:925-927.
986
41. Palmore TN, Henderson DK. Big brother is washing. Video surveillance for hand hygiene adherence, 987
through the lenses of efficacy and privacy. Clin Infect Dis 2012;54:8-9.
988
42. Boyce JM. Electronic Monitoring in Combination with Direct Observation as a Means to Improve 989
Hand Hygiene Compliance. American Journal of Infection Control (in press).
990
43. Pires D., Pittet D. Hand hygiene electronic monitoring: are we there yet? American Journal of 991
Infection Control (in press).
992
44. Larson EL, et al. An organizational climate intervention associated with increased handwashing and 993
decreased nosocomial infections. Behav Med 2000;26:14-22.
994
45. Larson EL, et al. Hand hygiene behavior in a pediatric emergency department and a pediatric intensive 995
care unit: comparison of use of 2 dispenser systems. Am J Crit Care 2005;14:304-11.
996
46. Kinsella G, et al. Electronic surveillance of wall-mounted soap and alcohol gel dispensers in an 997
intensive care unit. J Hosp Infect 2007; 66:34-9.
998
47. Whitby M, et al. Three successful interventions in health care workers that improve compliance with 999
hand hygiene: is sustained replication possible? Am J Infect Control 2008;36:349-55.
1000
48. Boyce JM, et al. Evaluation of an electronic device for real-time measurement of alcohol-based hand 1001
rub use. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2009;30:1090-5.
1002
49. Koff MD, et al. Reduction in ventilator associated pneumonia in a mixed intensive care unit after 1003
initiation of a novel hand hygiene program. J Crit Care 2011;26:489-95.
1004
50. Koff MD, et al. Reduction in intraoperative bacterial contamination of peripheral intravenous tubing 1005
through the use of a novel device. Anesthesiology 2009;110:978-85.
1006
51. Marra AR, et al. Controlled trial measuring the effect of a feedback intervention on hand hygiene 1007
compliance in a step-down unit. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2008;29:730-5.
1008
52. Marra AR, et al. Positive deviance: a new strategy for improving hand hygiene compliance. Infect 1009
Control Hosp Epidemiol 2010;31:12-20.
1010
53. Marra AR, et al. Measuring rates of hand hygiene adherence in the intensive care setting: a 1011
comparative study of direct observation, product usage, and electronic counting devices. Infect 1012
Control Hosp Epidemiol 2010;31:796-801.
1013
54. Marra AR, et al. Positive deviance: a program for sustained improvement in hand hygiene compliance.
1014
Am J Infect Control 2011;39:1-5.
1015
55. Macedo RC, et al. Positive deviance: using a nurse call system to evaluate hand hygiene practices. Am 1016
J Infect Control 2012;40:946-50.
1017
56. Helder OK, et al. Computer screen saver hand hygiene information curbs a negative trend in hand 1018
hygiene behavior. Am J Infect Control 2012;40:951-4.
1019
57. Helder OK, et al. Hand disinfection in a neonatal intensive care unit: continuous electronic monitoring 1020
over a oneyear period. BMC Infect Dis 2012;12:248.
1021
58. Morgan DJ, et al. Automated hand hygiene count devices may better measure compliance than human 1022
observation. Am J Infect Control 2012;40:955-9.
1023
59. Boscart VM, et al. Advanced technologies to curb healthcare-associated infections. Healthc Pap 1024
2009;9:51-5.
1025
60. Swoboda SM, et al. Electronic monitoring and voice prompts improve hand hygiene and decrease 1026
nosocomial infections in an intermediate care unit. Crit Care Med 2004;32:358-63.
1027
transmission of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus in a hematology unit. Am J Infect Control 1031
2008;36:199-205.
1032
63. Sahud AG, et al. Measuring hand hygiene compliance: a new frontier for improving hand hygiene.
1033
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2009;30:1132.
1034
64. Sahud AG, et al. An electronic hand hygiene surveillance device: a pilot study exploring surrogate 1035
markers for hand hygiene compliance. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2010;31:634-9.
1036
65. Sahud AG, et al. Feasibility and effectiveness of an electronic hand hygiene feedback device targeted 1037
to improve rates of hand hygiene. J Hosp Infect 2012;82:271-3.
1038
hygiene. Int J Med Inform 2011; 80:596-603.
1042
68. Cheng VC, et al. Introduction of an electronic monitoring system for monitoring compliance with 1043
Moments 1 and 4 of the WHO “My 5 Moments for Hand Hygiene” methodology. BMC Infect Dis 1044
2011;11:151.
1045
69. Polgreen PM, et al. Method for automated monitoring of hand hygiene adherence without radio-1046
frequency identification. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2010;31:1294-7.
1047
70. Fries J, et al. Monitoring hand hygiene via human observers: how should we be sampling? Infect 1048
Control Hosp Epidemiol 2012;33:689-95.
1049
71. Hornbeck T, et al. Using sensor networks to study the effect of peripatetic HCWs on the spread of 1050
hospital-associated infections. J Infect Dis 2012;206:1549-57.
1051
72. Sharma D, et al. The precision of human-generated hand-hygiene observations: a comparison of 1052
human observation with an automated monitoring system. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1053
2012;33:1259-61.
1054
73. Edmond MB, et al. Successful use of alcohol sensor technology to monitor and report hand hygiene 1055
compliance. J Hosp Infect 2010;76:364-5.
1056
74. Joch A. Badge brings automated edge to infection control. Interview by Alan Joch. Mater Manag 1057
Health Care 2009;18:15-17.
1058
75. Szilágyi1 L, et al. A large-scale assessment of hand hygiene quality and the effectiveness of the 1059
“WHO 6-steps”. BMC Infectious Diseases 2013, 13:249.
1060
76. Stewardson A, et al. Efficacy of a New Educational Tool to Improve Handrubbing Technique amongst 1061
HCWs: A Controlled, Before-After Study. PLoS ONE 2014 9(9): e105866.
1062
77. Higgins A, et al. Improved hand hygiene technique and compliance in HCWs using gaming 1063
technology. Journal of Hospital Infection, 84 (2013) 32-37.
1064
78. Laustsen S, Lund E, Bibby BM, Kristensen B, Thulstrup AM, Mller JK. Effect of correctly using 1065
alcohol-based hand rub in a clinical setting. Infect Control 2008;29(10):954–6.
1066
79. Pittet D. Hand hygiene: it’s all about when and how. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2008;29(10):957–
1067
9. Doi: 10.1086/592218.
1068
80. Boyce JM, Pittet D. Guideline for hand hygiene in health-care settings: recommendations of the 1069
Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee and the HICPAC/SHEA/APIC/IDSA 1070
Hand Hygiene Task Force. Am J Infect Control 2002;30(8):S1–46.
1071
81. European Committee for Standardization. European Norm 1500: chemical disinfectants and 1072
antiseptics. Hygienic handrub. Test method and requirements (phase 2/step 2). Version 2013.
1073
82. Macinga DR, Shumaker DJ, Werner H-P, et al. The relative influences of product volume, delivery 1074
format and alcohol concentration on dry-time and efficacy of alcohol-based hand rubs. BMC Infect 1075
Dis 2014;14(1):1.
1076
83. Gayet-Ageron A, Bellissimo-Rodrigues F, Soule H, Martin Y, Pittet D. Relationship between hand 1077
size, volume of alcohol-based handrub and time needed to dry hands. An experimental laboratory-1078
based study. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control 2015;4(Suppl 1):P303. Doi: 10.1186/2047-2994-4-S1-1079
P303.
1080
84. Kampf G, Marschall S, Eggerstedt S, Ostermeyer C. Efficacy of ethanol-based hand foams using 1081
clinically relevant amounts: a cross-over controlled study among healthy volunteers. BMC Infect Dis 1082
2010;10(1):1.
1083
85. Bellissimo-Rodrigues F, et al. Should alcohol-based hand rub use be customized according to HCWs 1084
hand size? Submitted to the International Conference on Prevention and Infection Control (ICPIC 1085
2015) on Mars 20, 2015. ICPIC15-ABS-1257.
1086
86. Pires D., Soule H., Bellissimo-Rodrigues F., Gayet-Ageron A., Pittet D. Hand hygiene with alcohol-1087
based handrub: how long is long enough? Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol (in press) 1088
87. Dharan S., Hugonnet S., Sax H., Pittet D. Comparison of Waterless Hand Antisepsis Agents at Short 1089
Application Times: Raising the Flag of Concern •. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2003;24(3):160–4.
1090
Doi: 10.1086/502182.
1091
88. Sickbert-Bennett EE., Weber DJ., Gergen-Teague MF., Sobsey MD., Samsa GP., Rutala WA.
1092
Comparative efficacy of hand hygiene agents in the reduction of bacteria and viruses. Am J Infect 1093
Control 2005;33(2):67–77. Doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2004.08.005.
1094
89. Vesin JM et al. Recognition of hand gestures through accelerometer signals. Application to patient 1095
safety (2006-2009), Swiss national fund for scientific research.
1096
trial: rationale, design, analysis, and reporting. BMJ 2015;351:h39 doi: 10 .113 6/bmj.h391162.
1100
94. WHO. Hand Hygiene Technical Reference Manual. 2009. Available at:
1106
http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2009/9789241598606_eng.pdf.
1107
95. Woertman W, de HE, Moerbeek M, Zuidema SU, Gerritsen DL, Teerenstra S. Stepped edge designs 1108
could reduce the required sample size in cluster randomized trials. J Clin Epidemiol 2013;66:752e8.
1109
96. Hemming K, Girling A. A menu driven facility for sample size for power and detectable difference 1110
calculations in stepped wedge randomised trials. Stata J 2014;14:363e80.
1111
97. Baio G, Copas A, Ambler G, Hargreaves J, Beard E, Omar RZ. Sample size calculation for a stepped 1112
wedge trial. Trials 2015;16:354-368 1113
98. Hemming K, Taljaard M. Sample size calculations for stepped wedge and cluster randomised trials: a 1114
unified approach. J Clin Epidemiol 2016;69:137-146.
1115 1116
99. White H. A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for 1117
heteroskedasticity. Econometrica 1980; 48: 817–38; Williams RL. A note on robust variance 1118
estimation for cluster-correlated data. Biometrics 2000; 56: 645–46.).
1119
100.European Medicines Agency (2015). Guideline on adjustment for baseline covariates in clinical trials.
1120
www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2015/03/WC500184923.pdf 1121
Accessed on 7 Mar 2017.
1122 1123 1124
27. Appendice 1
1125 1126
Corrections applied to the clip to increase its precision and monitoring of the volume of ABHR used in a pilot study.
1127 1128