4.1 Review

The World Health Organization's Clean Hands Save Lives: A concept applicable to equine medicine as Clean Hands Save Horses

Journal

EQUINE VETERINARY EDUCATION
Volume 30, Issue 10, Pages 549-557

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/eve.12680

Keywords

horse; infection control; hand hygiene; hospital acquired infections; surgical site infections

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Even before the discovery of germs, the practice of hand hygiene had revealed itself as a crucial element in the fight against infectious diseases. In fact, supported by the historical discoveries and more recent evidence based data, the World Health Organization considers hand hygiene as the pillar of infection control, particularly when related to nosocomial infections. Therefore, the World Health Organization has a strong focus on Clean Hands Save Lives campaigns, a principle that is easily translatable into Clean Hands Save Horses. Considering the recognised importance given to skin health and integrity as the first principle of good hand hygiene, using decontamination methods and products that are the least harmful to the skin is mandatory. This is why the currently accepted presurgical hand preparation methods do not involve aggressive brushing and disinfecting soaps anymore. Rather, hands should be washed with a neutral pH friendly soap first before a hydroalcoholic solution is applied. Although the principles and benefits of proper hand hygiene have been recognised in the healthcare world, one of the major drawbacks remains the lack of compliance with established protocols. To increase compliance, equine clinics should work on improving product accessibility, enhancing staff and client education as well as helping each other to remember to actually do it. This article reviews historical and current facts on hand hygiene and relates it to equine practice. Clean equine care is safer equine care: it's all in your hands!

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available