Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T08:12:06.251Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Precision of Human-Generated Hand-Hygiene Observations: A Comparison of Human Observation with an Automated Monitoring System

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Deepti Sharma
Affiliation:
Department of Biomedical Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa
Geb W. Thomas
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa
Eric D. Foster
Affiliation:
Department of Biostatistics, College of Public Health, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa
Jaclyn Iacovelli
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa
Krista M. Lea
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa
Judy A. Streit
Affiliation:
Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa
Philip M. Polgreen*
Affiliation:
Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa
*
Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Iowa, Carver College of Medicine, 200 Hawkins Drive, Iowa City, IA 52242 (philip-polgreen@uiowa.edu)

Abstract

We compared the observations of nearly 1,400 hand-hygiene-related events recorded by an automated system and by human observers. Observation details differed for 38% of these events. Two likely explanations for these inconsistencies were the distance between the observer and the event and the busyness of the clinic.

Type
Concise Communication
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 2012

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.)

References

1.Boyce, JM, Pittet, D. Guidelines for hand hygiene in health-care settings: recommendations of the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee and the HICPAC/SHEA/APIC/IDSA Hand Hygiene Task Force. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2002;23(suppl):S3S41.Google Scholar
2.Haas, JP, Larson, EL. Measurement of compliance with hand hygiene. J Hosp Infect 2007;66:614.Google Scholar
3.Eckmanns, T, Bessert, J, Behnke, M, Gastmeier, P, Ruden, H. Compliance with antiseptic hand rub use in intensive care units: the Hawthorne effect. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2006;27:931934.Google Scholar
4.Boscart, VM, McGilton, KS, Levchenko, A, Hufton, G, Holliday, P, Fernie, GR. Acceptability of a wearable hand hygiene device with monitoring capabilities. J Hosp Infect 2008;70:216222.Google Scholar
5.Boyce, JM, Cooper, T, Dolan, MJ. Evaluation of an electronic device for real-time measurement of alcohol-based hand rub use. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2009;30:10901095.Google Scholar
6.Broughall, JM, Marshman, C, Jackson, B, Bird, P. An automatic monitoring system for measuring handwashing frequency in hospital wards. J Hosp Infect 1984;5:447453.Google Scholar
7.Boyce, JM. Measuring healthcare worker hand hygiene activity: current practices and emerging technologies. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2011;32:10161028.Google Scholar
8.Venkatesh, AK, Lankford, MG, Rooney, DM, Blachford, T, Watts, CM, Noskin, GA. Use of electronic alerts to enhance hand hygiene compliance and decrease transmission of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus in a hematology unit. Am J Infect Control 2008;35:199205.Google Scholar
9.Polgreen, PM, Hlady, CS, Severson, MA, Segre, AM, Herman, T. Method for automated monitoring of hand hygiene compliance without radio-frequency identification. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2010;31:12941297.Google Scholar
10.Sax, H, Allegranzi, B, Chraïti, MN, Boyce, J, Larson, E, Pittet, D. The World Health Organization hand hygiene observation method. Am J Infect Control 2009;37(10):827834.Google Scholar