Search

Purpose of Review: There is growing concern that changes in nurse workforce and hospital-restructuring interventions negatively impact on patient outcomes. This review focuses on the association between understaffing and health-care-associated infections., Recent Findings: There is a large number of studies showing that overcrowding, understaffing or a misbalance between workload and resources are important determinants of nosocomial infections and cross-transmission of microorganisms. Importantly, not only the number of staff but also the level of their training affects outcomes. The nurse workforce is ageing, mainly due to fewer individuals' engaging in a nursing career. This phenomenon, combined with cost-driven downsizing, contributes to a nursing shortage, and this tendency is not expected to revert unless important system changes are implemented. The causal pathway between understaffing and infection is complex, and factors might include lack of time to comply with infection control recommendations, job dissatisfaction, job-related burnout, absenteeism and a high staff turnover., Summary: The evidence that cost-driven downsizing and changes in staffing patterns causes harm to patients cannot be ignored, and should not be considered as an inevitable outcome. More research is needed to better define the optimal patient-to-nurse ratio in various hospital settings and to estimate the economical impact of the nursing shortage. All quality-improvement interventions should carefully take into account systems and processes to be successful, as the issue of staffing is essentially a structural problem.

We evaluated the costs associated with a sustained and successful campaign for hand hygiene promotion that emphasized alcohol-based handrubs. The total cost of the hand hygiene promotion corresponded to less than 1% of the costs associated with nosocomial infections. Successful hand hygiene promotion is probably cost-saving.

Objective: To evaluate the dynamics of bacterial contamination of healthcare workers' (HCWs) hands during neonatal care., Setting: The 20-bed neonatal unit of a large acute care teaching hospital in Geneva, Switzerland., Methods: Structured observation sessions were conducted. A sequence of care began when the HCW performed hand hygiene and ended when the activity changed or hand hygiene was performed again. Alcohol-based handrub was the standard procedure for hand hygiene. An imprint of the five fingertips of the dominant hand was obtained before and after hand hygiene and at the end of a sequence of care. Regression methods were used to model the final bacterial count according to the type and duration of care and the use of gloves., Results: One hundred forty-nine sequences of care were observed. Commensal skin flora comprised 72.4% of all culture-positive specimens (n = 360). Other microorganisms identified were Enterobacteriaceae (n = 55, 13.8%); Staphylococcus aureus (n = 10, 2.5%); and fungi (n = 7, 1.8%). Skin contact, respiratory care, and diaper change were independently associated with an increased bacterial count; the use of gloves did not fully protect HCWs' hands from bacterial contamination., Conclusions: These data confirm that hands become progressively contaminated with commensal flora and potential pathogens during neonatal care, and identify activities at higher risk for hand contamination. They also reinforce the need for hand hygiene after a sequence of care, before starting a different task, and after glove removal.

Background: Nosocomial infection is a leading complication in intensive care units. Although hand hygiene is the single most efficient preventive measure, compliance with this simple action remains low., Objectives: To assess the effect of an intervention to promote hand hygiene and to investigate risk factors for noncompliance in intensive care units., Methods: We performed 7 observational surveys and implemented a promotional campaign after baseline in medical, surgical, and pediatric intensive care units of a teaching hospital. Health care workers were observed during routine patient care. The intervention consisted of a hospitalwide promotional campaign, including observation and performance feedback, posters display, and distribution of individual bottles of alcohol-based handrub. The main outcome measure was compliance with hand hygiene through handwashing or handrubbing., Results: We observed 2743 opportunities for hand hygiene distributed over 248 periods. Overall compliance increased from 38.4% to 54.5% during the study (P<.001). Although recourse to handwashing remained stable at around 30%, handrubbing increased from 5.4% at baseline to 21.7% at the last survey (P<.001). Compliance increased among nurses and nursing assistants, but remained stable among physicians. Handwashing compliance decreased, on average, by 4.7% for an increase of 10 opportunities for hand hygiene per hour of patient care (P<.001), whereas no such association existed for handrubbing., Conclusions: Our intervention induced a marked and sustained increase in compliance with hand hygiene. In intensive care units, less time-consuming handrubbing might replace standard handwashing and overcome the barrier of time constraints.

Background: Hand hygiene prevents cross infection in hospitals, but compliance with recommended instructions is commonly poor. We attempted to promote hand hygiene by implementing a hospital-wide programme, with special emphasis on bedside, alcohol-based hand disinfection. We measured nosocomial infections in parallel., Methods: We monitored the overall compliance with hand hygiene during routine patient care in a teaching hospital in Geneva, Switzerland, before and during implementation of a hand-hygiene campaign. Seven hospital-wide observational surveys were done twice yearly from December, 1994, to December, 1997. Secondary outcome measures were nosocomial infection rates, attack rates of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), and consumption of handrub disinfectant., Findings: We observed more than 20,000 opportunities for hand hygiene. Compliance improved progressively from 48% in 1994, to 66% in 1997 (p<0.001). Although recourse to handwashing with soap and water remained stable, frequency of hand disinfection substantially increased during the study period (p<0.001). This result was unchanged after adjustment for known risk factors of poor adherence. Hand hygiene improved significantly among nurses and nursing assistants, but remained poor among doctors. During the same period, overall nosocomial infection decreased (prevalence of 16.9% in 1994 to 9.9% in 1998; p=0.04), MRSA transmission rates decreased (2.16 to 0.93 episodes per 10,000 patient-days; p<0.001), and the consumption of alcohol-based handrub solution increased from 3.5 to 15.4 L per 1000 patient-days between 1993 and 1998 (p<0.001)., Interpretation: The campaign produced a sustained improvement in compliance with hand hygiene, coinciding with a reduction of nosocomial infections and MRSA transmission. The promotion of bedside, antiseptic handrubs largely contributed to the increase in compliance.