Should automated electronic hand hygiene monitoring systems be implemented in routine patient care? Systematic review and appraisal with Medical Research Council Framework for Complex Interventions

Manual hand-hygiene audit is time-consuming, labour-intensive and inaccurate. Automated hand-hygiene monitoring systems (AHHMSs) offer advantages (generation of standardized data, avoidance of the Hawthorne effect). World Health Organization Guidelines for Hand Hygiene published in 2009 suggest that AHHMSs are a possible alternative. The objective of this review was to assess the current state of the literature for AHHMSs and offer recommendations for use in real-world settings. This was a systematic literature review, and publications included were from the time that PubMed commenced until 19th November 2023. Forty-three publications met the criteria. Using the Medical Research Council's Framework for Developing and Evaluating Complex Interventions, two were categorized as intervention development studies. Thirty-nine were evaluations. Two described implementation in real-world settings. Most were small scale and short duration. AHHMSs in conjunction with additional intervention (visual or auditory cue, performance feedback) could increase hand hygiene compliance in the short term. Impact on infection rates was difficult to determine. In the few publications where costs and resources were considered, time devoted to improving hand hygiene compliance increased when an AHHMS was in use. Health workers' opinions about AHHMSs were mixed. In conclusion, at present too little is known about the longer-term advantages of AHHMSs to recommend uptake in routine patient care. Until more longer-term accounts of implementation (over 12 months) become available, efforts should be made to improve direct observation of hand hygiene compliance to improve its accuracy and credibility. The Medical Research Council Framework could be used to categorize other complex interventions involving use of technology to prevent infection to help establish readiness for implementation

Sure Start Collingwood and Stepney Local Programme Midwifery Project Evaluation

This report forms the basis of an evaluation of Sure Start Collingwood and Stepney (SSC&S) Local Programme Midwifery Project. The midwifery project had been running for 15 months with a part-time midwife (0.6 FTE) and a full-time bilingual (English Sylheti) support worker. The project was designed to offer one to one antenatal and postnatal support to all women within the area. The project, along with all other Sure Start Programmes in the London Borough of Tower Hamlets (LBTH) has now finished as the new focus of Sure Start is with the Children’s Centres. Sure Start Collingwood and Stepney is located in one of the most socially deprived boroughs in the country which has a high level of health inequality, high unemployment, extremely over crowded housing and a large minority ethnic population, many of whom do not speak English as a first language

Survey to explore understanding of the principles of aseptic technique: Qualitative content analysis with descriptive analysis of confidence and training

BACKGROUND: In many countries, aseptic procedures are undertaken by nurses in the general ward setting, but variation in practice has been reported, and evidence indicates that the principles underpinning aseptic technique are not well understood. METHODS: A survey was conducted, employing a brief, purpose-designed, self-reported questionnaire. RESULTS: The response rate was 72%. Of those responding, 65% of nurses described aseptic technique in terms of the procedure used to undertake it, and 46% understood the principles of asepsis. The related concepts of cleanliness and sterilization were frequently confused with one another. Additionally, 72% reported that they not had received training for at least 5 years; 92% were confident of their ability to apply aseptic technique; and 90% reported that they had not been reassessed since their initial training. Qualitative analysis confirmed a lack of clarity about the meaning of aseptic technique. CONCLUSION: Nurses' understanding of aseptic technique and the concepts of sterility and cleanliness is inadequate, a finding in line with results of previous studies. This knowledge gap potentially places patients at risk. Nurses' understanding of the principles of asepsis could be improved. Further studies should establish the generalizability of the study findings. Possible improvements include renewed emphasis during initial nurse education, greater opportunity for updating knowledge and skills post-qualification, and audit of practice

Survey with content analysis to explore nurses’ satisfaction with opportunities to undertake continuing professional education in relation to aseptic technique

Background Aseptic technique is a key skill undertaken every day by large numbers of nurses. However, there is relatively little empirical evidence to underpin practice. Furthermore, it is not clear to what extent it should be considered a single task or a set of principles to be applied differentially depending upon the situation and how individual nurses make this decision. Objective This study explored nurses’ experiences of continuing professional education (CPE) in relation to aseptic technique. Design A national survey was undertaken throughout the United Kingdom. Responses were subjected to inductive quantitative content analysis. Participants Participants were recruited via an electronic link placed on the website of a major nursing organisation. Results 941 nurses responded. 253 (26.88%) were satisfied with arrangements for continuing professional education. Satisfaction was associated with a perception of good support from employers, sound preparation before qualifying and practising aseptic technique regularly. 311 (33.05%) were dissatisfied. Reasons included witnessing unwarranted variations in practice (n= 55, 5.84%), witnessing suboptimal practice requiring correction (65, 6.9%), a perception that standards had fallen through a decline in pre-registration preparation (n=109, 11.58%) and opportunities for updating (n= 124, 13.17%). Some employers had introduced training in conjunction with organisation-wide change in practice. In other cases participants reported receiving updates when required to perform a new procedure, when moving between clinical specialities or changing employer. Train-the-trainer (cascade) teaching was used in formal and informal arrangements for updating. Conclusion This study provides a springboard for exploring arrangements for updating and assessing nurses’ competence to undertake aseptic technique. Health providers need to evaluate what is currently provided and address gaps in provision. There is clear evidence that the current system does not meet the needs of many nurses

Associations between Age, Years in Post, Years in the Profession and Personal Experience of Mental Health Problems in UK Mental Health Nurses

Nurses' mental health is of paramount importance, both in terms of patient safety and the sustainability of the workforce. Age, years in the profession, in post and personal experience or exposure to mental health problems are relevant to the mental health nursing workforce crisis in the United Kingdom. This study aimed to determine the relationship between age, years in the profession and post and self-reported experience of mental health problems using an online cross-sectional survey of 225 UK mental health nurses. Number of years in post was inversely correlated with overall experience of mental health problems, particularly living with someone else with mental health problems. Those with experience of living with someone with mental health problems had significantly fewer years of professional experience than those without. This article discusses possible explanations for this phenomenon and makes the case for future research on the topic

Research ethics systems, processes, and awareness across Europe: Radiography research ethics standards for Europe (RRESFE)

Introduction: The Radiography Research Ethics Standards for Europe (RRESFE) project aims to provide a cross-sectional snapshot of current research ethics systems, processes, and awareness of such, across Europe together with identifying the associated challenges, education, and training needs. Methods: A cross-sectional online survey targeting radiography researchers in Europe was conducted. Data collection took place between April 26 and July 12, 2021, using a snowball sampling approach. Descriptive and analytical statistics were used to identify trends in research ethics frameworks across Europe. Results: 285 responses were received across 33 European and 23 non-European countries. Most (n = 221; 95%) European respondents stated ethics approval is required before commencing research in their country. Requirements around research ethics approval and awareness of such requirements varied by European region (X2 (2, n = 129) = 7.234, p = 0.013) and were found to differ depending on the type of research participant and study design. Additionally, European respondents reported ethics approval is a national requirement more often than their non-European counterparts (X2 (1, n = 282) = 4.316, p = 0.049). Requirements for ethics approval were also associated with the undergraduate programme duration (2-year vs. 3-year vs. 3.5 year vs. 4-year vs. multiple programme durations; X2 (4, n = 231) = 10.075, p = 0.016) and availability of postgraduate training (postgraduate training available vs. postgraduate training not available; X2 (1, n = 231) = 15.448, p = <0.001) within respondents’ country. Conclusion: Respondents from countries with longer programme durations/availability of multiple programme lengths, availability of postgraduate training, and establishment of European Qualifications Framework Level 6 were generally associated with less uncertainty and more comprehensive research ethics requirements. Implications for practice: Results are informative of the current status of research ethics within evidence-based radiography

Association between fertility and HIV status: what implications for HIV estimates?

Background: Most estimates of HIV prevalence have been based on sentinel surveillance of pregnant women which may either under-estimate or over-estimate the actual prevalence in adult female population. One situation which can lead to either an underestimate or an overestimate of the actual HIV prevalence is where there is a significant difference in fertility rates between HIV-positive and HIV-negative women. Our aim was to compare the fertility rates of HIV-infected and HIV-uninfected women in Cameroon in order to make recommendations on the appropriate adjustments when using antenatal sentinel data to estimate HIV prevalence Methods: Cross-sectional, population-based study using data from 4493 sexually active women aged 15 to 49 years who participated in the 2004 Cameroon Demographic and Health Survey. Results: In the rural area, the age-specific fertility rates in both HIV positive and HIV negative women increased from 15-19 years age bracket to a maximum at 20-24 years and then decreased monotonically till 35-49 years. Similar trends were observed in the urban area. The overall fertility rate for HIV positive women was 118.7 births per 1000 woman-years (95% Confidence Interval [CI] 98.4 to 142.0) compared to 171.3 births per 1000 woman-years (95% CI 164.5 to 178.2) for HIV negative women. The ratio of the fertility rate in HIV positive women to the fertility rate of HIV negative women (called the relative inclusion ratio) was 0.69 (95% CI 0.62 to 0.75). Conclusion: Fertility rates are lower in HIV-positive than HIV-negative women in Cameroon. The findings of this study support the use of summary RIR for the adjustment of HIV prevalence (among adult female population) obtained from sentinel surveillance in antenatal clinics

Predicting the risk of Chronic Kidney Disease in Men and Women in England and Wales: prospective derivation and external validation of the QKidney® Scores

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Chronic Kidney Disease is a major cause of morbidity and interventions now exist which can reduce risk. We sought to develop and validate two new risk algorithms (the QKidney^®Scores) for estimating (a) the individual 5 year risk of moderate-severe CKD and (b) the individual 5 year risk of developing End Stage Kidney Failure in a primary care population.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We conducted a prospective open cohort study using data from 368 QResearch^®general practices to develop the scores. We validated the scores using two separate sets of practices - 188 separate QResearch^®practices and 364 practices contributing to the THIN database.</p> <p>We studied 775,091 women and 799,658 men aged 35-74 years in the QResearch^®derivation cohort, who contributed 4,068,643 and 4,121,926 person-years of observation respectively.</p> <p>We had two main outcomes (a) moderate-severe CKD (defined as the first evidence of CKD based on the earliest of any of the following: kidney transplant; kidney dialysis; diagnosis of nephropathy; persistent proteinuria; or glomerular filtration rate of < 45 mL/min) and (b) End Stage Kidney Failure.</p> <p>We derived separate risk equations for men and women. We calculated measures of calibration and discrimination using the two separate validation cohorts.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Our final model for moderate-severe CKD included: age, ethnicity, deprivation, smoking, BMI, systolic blood pressure, diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, cardiovascular disease, treated hypertension, congestive cardiac failure; peripheral vascular disease, NSAID use and family history of kidney disease. In addition, it included SLE and kidney stones in women. The final model for End Stage Kidney Failure was similar except it did not include NSAID use.</p> <p>Each risk prediction algorithms performed well across all measures in both validation cohorts. For the THIN cohort, the model to predict moderate-severe CKD explained 56.38% of the total variation in women and 57.49% for men. The D statistic values were high with values of 2.33 for women and 2.38 for men. The ROC statistic was 0.875 for women and 0.876 for men.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>These new algorithms have the potential to identify high risk patients who might benefit from more detailed assessment, closer monitoring or interventions to reduce their risk.</p