Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-mwwwr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-09-05T12:16:08.888Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of an Automated Sink on Handwashing Practices and Attitudes in High-Risk Units

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 June 2016

Elaine Larson ,
Allison McGeer ,
Z. Ahmed Quraishi ,
Dina Krenzischek ,
B.J. Parsons ,
Jack Holdford  and
Walter J. Hierholzer
Elaine Larson*
Affiliation:
Johns Hopkins University and Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland
Allison McGeer
Affiliation:
Yale New Haven Hospital, New Haven, Connecticut
Z. Ahmed Quraishi
Affiliation:
College of Osteopathic Medicine, Chicago, Illinois
Dina Krenzischek
Affiliation:
Johns Hopkins University and Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland
B.J. Parsons
Affiliation:
Yale New Haven Hospital, New Haven, Connecticut
Jack Holdford
Affiliation:
Johns Hopkins University and Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland
Walter J. Hierholzer
Affiliation:
Yale New Haven Hospital, New Haven, Connecticut
*
The Johns Hopkins University School of Nursing, 386 Houck Building, 600 N. Wolfe St., Baltimore, MD 21205
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective:

To assess the effects of an automated sink on handwashing practices and attitudes of staff.

Design:

Quasi-experimental crossover design.

Setting:

Two high-risk patient care areas, one postanesthesia recovery room (Site 1), and one neonatal intensive care unit (Site 2) in two tertiary care hospitals.

Participants:

All patient care staff on study units; approximately 55 individuals.

Interventions:

An automated sink was installed to replace one handwashing sink for about five weeks; the sink was then crossed-over for an equivalent time period to the other location. Handwashing practices of all unit staff were observed in three two-hour observation periods/week. Questionnaires were distributed to staff two weeks after sink installation and at the study's end.

Results:

One thousand, six hundred ten handwashes were observed. Handwashing practices differed significantly by site. For both sites, hands were washed significantly better but significantly less often with the automated sink (all p<.001). Staff expressed negative attitudes, however, about certain features of the sink, and these negative attitudes increased over the study period.

Conclusions:

Automated devices must be flexible enough to allow adjustments based on staff acceptance. Application of new technology to improve hand hygiene requires a multifaceted approach to behavior change. (Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1991;12:422-428.)

Information

Type
Original Articles
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 12 , Issue 7 , July 1991 , pp. 422 - 428
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1. Mendelson, W. Maimonides: a twelfth century physician. Annals of Medical History. 1923;5:250–262.Google Scholar
2. Clara, FR. Giannini, Semmelweis and handwashiig. Ann Intern Med. 1977;86:241. Letter.10.7326/0003-4819-86-2-241_2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Holmes, OW. Puerperal fever, as a private pestilence. In: Holmes, OW. Currents and-Counter-Currents in Medical Science. Boston, Mass: Tickner and Fields: 1861:189–274.Google Scholar
4. Spriggs, SS. Oliver Wend& Holmes and the doctrine of Semmelweis. Lancet. 1909;ii:882.Google Scholar
5. Newton, RC. A brief study of the contribution of Ignaz Phillip Semmelweis to modem medicine. Medical Record. 1910;78:431–435.Google Scholar
6. Saltzman, TC, Clark, JJ, Fleman, L. Hand contamination of personnel as a mechanism of cross-infection in nosocomial infection with antibiotic resistant E coli and Klebsiella-Aerobacter . Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1967;7:97–100.Google Scholar
7. Casewell, M, Phillips, I. Hands as a route of transmission for Klebsiella sp. Br Med J. 1977;2:1315–1317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Reybrouch, G. Role of the hands in the spread of nosocomial infections. J Hosp Infect. 1983;4:103–110.10.1016/0195-6701(83)90040-3Google Scholar
9. Dixon, RE. Effect of infections on hospital care. Ann Intern Med. 1978;2:749.10.7326/0003-4819-89-5-749CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Massanari, RM, Hierholzer, WJ. A crossover comparison of antiseptic soaps on nosocomial infection rates in intensive care units. Am J Infect Control. 1984;12:247–248.Google Scholar
11. Larson, E. A causal link between handwashing and risk of infection? Examination of the evidence. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1988;9:23–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12. Maki, DG, Hecht, JA. Comparative study of handwashing with chlorhexidine, povidone iodine and non-germicidal soap for prevention of nosocomial infection. Clin Res. 1982;30:303A.Google Scholar
13. Larson, E, Killien, M. Factors influencing handwashing behavior of patient care personnel. Am /Infect Control. 1982;10:93–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14. Larson, E. Persistent carriage of gram-negative bacteria on hands. Am J Infect Control. 1981;9:112–116.10.1016/S0196-6553(81)80091-0CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15. Larson, E. Effects of handwashing frequency and clinical area on hand flora. Am IInfect Control. 1984;12:76–82.10.1016/0196-6553(84)90020-8Google Scholar
16. Garner, JS, Favero, MS. Guideline for Handwashing and Hospital Environmental Control. Atlanta, Ga: Centers for Disease Control; 1985.Google Scholar
17. Larson, E, Eke, PI, Wilder, MP, Laughon, BE. Quantity of soap as a variable in handwashiig. Infect Control. 1987;8:371–375.Google Scholar
18. Preston, GA, Larson, EL, Stamm, WE. The effect of private isolation rooms on patient care practices: colonization and infection in an intensive care unit. Am J Med. 1981;70:641–645.Google Scholar
19. Albert, RK, Condie, E Handwashing patterns in medical intensive care units. N Engl J Med. 1981;304:1465–1466.10.1056/NEJM198106113042404CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20. Larson, E. Compliance with isolation technique. Am J Infect Control. 1983;11:221–225.10.1016/0196-6553(83)90004-4CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
21. Donowitz, LG. Handwashing technique in a pediatric intensive care unit. Am J Dis Child. 1987;141:683–685.Google Scholar
22. Quraishi, ZA, McGuckin, M, Blais, IX. Duration of handwashing in intensive care units: a descriptive study. Am J Infect Control. 1984;12:83–87.10.1016/0196-6553(84)90021-XGoogle Scholar
23. Larson, E, McGinley, K, Grove, G, Leyden, J, Talbot, G. Physiologic, microbiologic gnd seasonal effects of handwashing on the skin of health care nersonnel. Am J Infect Control. 1986;14:51–59.Google Scholar
24. Mayer, JA, Dubbert, PM, Miller, M, Burkett, PA, Chapman, SW. Increasing handwashing in an intensive care unit. Infect Control. 1986;7:259–262.Google Scholar
25. Conly, JM, Hill, S, Ross, J, Lertzman, J, Louie, TJ. Handwashing practices in an intensive care unit: the effects of an educational program and its relationship to infection rates. Am J Infect Control. 1989;17:330–339.10.1016/0196-6553(89)90002-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26. Kaplan, LM, McGuckin, M. Increasing handwashing compliance with more accessible sink. Infect Control. 1986;7:408–410.10.1017/S019594170006464XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
27. Larson, E, Larson, E. Influence of a role model on handwashing behavior. Am J Infect Control. 1983;11:146. Abstract.Google Scholar
28. Larson, E. Handwashing and skin physiologic and bacteriologic aspects. Infect Control. 1985;6:20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
29. Soule, BM. The APIC Curriculum for Infection Control Practice. Dubuque, Ia: Kendall/Hunt; 1983.Google Scholar
30. Fienstein, AR. The architecture of clinical research. In: Clinical Epidemiology. Philadelphia, Pa: W.B. Saunders Co.; 1985:228–229.Google Scholar
31. Larson, E. Evaluating handwashing technique. J Adv Nurs. 1985;10:547–552.Google Scholar
32. Green, L, Kreuter, MW, Deeds, S, Partridge, K. Health Education Planning: A Diagnostic Approach. Palo Alto, Calif: Mayfield Publishing Co.; 1980.Google Scholar
33. Maiman, L, Green, L, Gibson, G. Education for self-treatment by adult asthmatics. JAMA. 1979;241:1919–1922.10.1001/jama.1979.03290440041026Google Scholar
34. Bennett, BI. A model for teaching health education skills to primarv care practitioners. International Journal of Health Education. 1977;20:232–239.Google Scholar
35. Erickson, MP, Grielen, AC. The application of health education principles to automobile child restraint programs. Health Educ Q. 1983;10:30–55.10.1177/109019818301000102Google Scholar
36. Winickoff, RN, Coltin, KL, Morgan, MM, Buxbaum, RC, Barnett, GO. Improving physician performance through peer comparison feedback. Med Care. 1984;22:527–534.10.1097/00005650-198406000-00003Google Scholar
37. Siscovick, DS, Stragatz, DS, Wagner, EH, et al. Provider-oriented interventions and mangement of hypertension. Med Care. 1987;25:254–258.10.1097/00005650-198703000-00009Google Scholar
38. Linn, BS. Impact on emergency room bum care. JAMA. 1980;244:565–570.10.1001/jama.1980.03310060021015Google Scholar
39. Grimm, RH, Shimoni, K, Harlan, WR, Estes, EH. Evaluation of patient-care protocol use by various providers. N Engl J Med. 1975;292:507–511.Google Scholar
40. Green, LW, Ericksen, MP, Schor, EL. Preventive practices by physicians: behavioral determinants and potential interventions. Am J Prev Med. 1988;4(suppl):101–107.Google Scholar