4.5 Article

Effects of light-guided nudges on health care workers' hand hygiene behavior

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INFECTION CONTROL
卷 51, 期 12, 页码 1370-1376

出版社

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajic.2023.05.006

关键词

Compliance; Nudging; Hospital-acquired infection; Infection prevention; Electronic monitoring systems

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Nudging with sensor lights can improve and sustain the hand hygiene compliance of physicians and nurses, reducing hospital-acquired infections.
Background: Hospital-acquired infections are the most frequent adverse events in health care and can be reduced by improving the hand hygiene compliance (HHC) of health care workers (HCWs). We aimed to investigate the effect of nudging with sensor lights on HCWs' HHC. Methods: An 11-month intervention study was conducted in 2 inpatient departments at a university hospital. An automated monitoring system (Sani NudgeTM) measured the HHC. Reminder and feedback nudges with lights were displayed on alcohol-based hand rub dispensers. We compared the baseline HHC with HHC during periods of nudging and used the follow-up data to establish if a sustained effect had been achieved. Results: A total of 91 physicians, 135 nurses, and 15 cleaning staff were enrolled in the study. The system registered 274,085 hand hygiene opportunities in patient rooms, staff restrooms, clean rooms, and unclean rooms. Overall, a significant, sustained effect was achieved by nudging with lights in relation to contact with patients and patient-near surroundings for both nurses and physicians. Furthermore, a significant effect was observed on nurses' HHC in restrooms and clean rooms. No significant effect was found for the cleaning staff. Conclusions: Reminder or feedback nudges with light improved and sustained physicians' and nurses' HHC, and constitute a new way of changing HCWs' hand hygiene behavior. (c) 2023 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据