Understanding hand hygiene behaviour in the intensive care unit to inform interventions: an interview study

Uncovering the obstacles: a comprehensive analysis of barriers to hand hygiene adherence among healthcare providers: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Hand hygiene is the most effective and feasible infection prevention and control measure within the healthcare facilities. Despite the ease and simplicity of the technique, the adherence rate among health professionals remains suboptimal. Hence, developing targeted interventions to improve adherence requires a clear understanding of these obstacles. Therefore, this systematic reviews of existing literature aims to fully understand the context specific barriers of hand hygiene to answer why barriers persisted despite the interventions to maintaining hand hygiene practices among healthcare providers.

METHODS

This systematic review was conducted to synthesize existing evidence according to the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) qualitative studies review methodology on qualitative studies publish between the year 2010 and 2024. The study is reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guideline (PRISMA) and the protocol for the study was published on PROSPERO (CRD42024573753) before commencing the study.

RESULT

The review included twenty eight studies that are conducted in different regions of the world representing six of the continents. The study identified four interconnected themes of barriers with many subthemes. Behavioural barriers and organizational barriers were the most highlighted themes within the review. Physical barriers were one of the significant themes, where unavailability and inconvenience of hand hygiene resources gain the most attention by study participants across the studies. The fourth theme was societal/interpersonal barriers characterized by negative social influence and unsupportive colleagues.

CONCLUSION

The study highlights that the barriers to hand hygiene adherence among healthcare professionals are intertwined and complex, with the main interplaying among behavioural, societal/interpersonal, physical, and organizational barriers. The findings underscore that the intertwined nature of these barriers requires a multifaceted approach involving the relevant stakeholders to improve hand hygiene adherence among healthcare providers.

Please mind the gap between guidelines & behavior change: A systematic review and a consideration on effectiveness in healthcare

BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVE

This systematic review evaluates the impact of guidelines on healthcare professionals' behavior and explores the resulting outcomes.

METHODS

Using PRISMA methodology, Scopus and Web of Science databases were searched, yielding 624 results. After applying inclusion criteria, 67 articles were selected for in-depth analysis.

RESULTS

The studies focused on key clusters: Target behaviors, Effectiveness, Research designs, Behavioral frameworks, and Publication outlets. Prescription behavior was the most studied (58.2 %), followed by other health-related behaviors (31.3 %) and hygiene practices (10.4 %). Significant behavior changes were reported in 46.3 % of studies, with 17.9 % showing negative effects, and 22.4 % reporting mixed results. Quantitative methods dominated (56.8 %), while qualitative methods (19.4 %) and review designs (13.4 %) were less common. Theoretical Domain Framework (TDF) and Behavior Change Wheel (BCW) were frequently used frameworks, with the UK and the USA contributing most studies. Medical doctors (44.8 %) were the primary participants, followed by general healthcare providers (37.3 %).

CONCLUSIONS

The study highlights the varied effectiveness of guidelines, with prescription behavior being the most investigated. Guidelines influenced behavior positively in less than half of the cases, and doctors were the primary focus, rather than nurses. The complexity of interventions suggests a need for further research to develop more effective behavioral interventions and to standardize methodological approaches to reduce clinical variation in healthcare.

Improving healthcare professionals' interactions with patients to tackle antimicrobial resistance: a systematic review of interventions, barriers, and facilitators

Introduction

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a major public health threat. With the growing emphasis on patient-centred care/ shared decision making, it is important for healthcare professionals' (HCPs) who prescribe, dispense, administer and/or monitor antimicrobials to be adequately equipped to facilitate appropriate antimicrobial use. We systematically identified existing interventions which aim to improve HCPs interaction with patients and examined barriers and facilitators of appropriate the use of such interventions and appropriate antimicrobial use among both HCPs and patientsantimicrobial use while using these interventions.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and internet (via Google search engine). We included primary studies, published in English from 2010 to 2023 [PROSPERO (CRD42023395642)]. The protocol was preregistered with PROSPERO (CRD42023395642). We performed quality assessment using mixed methods appraisal tool. We applied narrative synthesis and used the COM-B (Capability, Opportunity, Motivation -Behaviour) as a theoretical framework for barriers and facilitators at HCP and patient levels.

Results

Of 9,172 citations retrieved from database searches, From 4,979 citations remained after removal of duplicates. We included 59 studies spanning over 13 countries. Interventions often involved multiple components beyond HCPs' interaction with patients. From 24 studies reporting barriers and facilitators, we identified issues relating to capability (such as, knowledge/understanding about AMR, diagnostic uncertainties, awareness of interventions and forgetfulness); opportunity (such as, time constraint and intervention accessibility) and motivation (such as, patient's desire for antibiotics and fear of litigation).

Conclusion

The findings of this review should be considered by intervention designers/adopters and policy makers to improve utilisation and effectiveness.

Experiences of implementing the 'Making Every Contact Count' initiative into a UK integrated care system: an interview study

BACKGROUND

The 'Making Every Contact Count' (MECC) approach is in line with the current National Health Service (NHS) strategy to improve and prevent health conditions in England. Despite its importance and value for preventative healthcare, implementation of MECC varies. The aim of this study was to explore the barriers and facilitators of implementing MECC and MECC training into an integrated care system (ICS).

METHODS

Remote semi-structured interviews were conducted with staff across an ICS in the North West of England who were involved in implementing and delivering MECC across the region. Data were analysed initially using an inductive thematic analysis approach and then interpreted using the 'Capability, Opportunity, Motivation = Behaviour' (COM-B) model of behaviour change.

RESULTS

We interviewed nine stakeholders and identified three superordinate themes: (1) macro-level barriers and facilitators, e.g. funding; (2) organizational level barriers and facilitators, e.g. time and resource; and (3) individual-level barriers/facilitators for both MECC trainers and MECC agents.

CONCLUSIONS

MECC has potential to meet the needs of the public's health, but barriers to its implementation exist. MECC must be successfully embedded into organizations and regions in which it is implemented, which relies on further development of an appropriate infrastructure including sustainable funding and a shift in culture to value preventative healthcare.

Implementing strategies to prevent infections in acute-care settings

This document introduces and explains common implementation concepts and frameworks relevant to healthcare epidemiology and infection prevention and control and can serve as a stand-alone guide or be paired with the "SHEA/IDSA/APIC Compendium of Strategies to Prevent Healthcare-Associated Infections in Acute Care Hospitals: 2022 Updates," which contain technical implementation guidance for specific healthcare-associated infections. This Compendium article focuses on broad behavioral and socio-adaptive concepts and suggests ways that infection prevention and control teams, healthcare epidemiologists, infection preventionists, and specialty groups may utilize them to deliver high-quality care. Implementation concepts, frameworks, and models can help bridge the "knowing-doing" gap, a term used to describe why practices in healthcare may diverge from those recommended according to evidence. It aims to guide the reader to think about implementation and to find resources suited for a specific setting and circumstances by describing strategies for implementation, including determinants and measurement, as well as the conceptual models and frameworks: 4Es, Behavior Change Wheel, CUSP, European and Mixed Methods, Getting to Outcomes, Model for Improvement, RE-AIM, REP, and Theoretical Domains.

A qualitative interview study applying the COM-B model to explore how hospital-based trainers implement antimicrobial stewardship education and training in UK hospital-based care

BACKGROUND

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a major global health threat caused by the inappropriate use of antimicrobials in healthcare and other settings. Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) is a broad multi-component health services intervention that promotes and monitors the judicious use of antimicrobials to preserve their future effectiveness. A main component of AMS is education and training (E&T). However, there are often discrepancies in how such interventions are implemented and delivered in hospital-based care. The aim of this study was to explore the factors influencing the implementation of AMS E&T in UK hospitals.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were carried out with AMS E&T trainers in UK hospitals. The interview schedule was developed using the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation = Behaviour (COM-B) model. Participants were identified via professional networks and social media. Interviews were analysed using inductive thematic analysis, followed by deductive analysis using the COM-B model as a framework.

RESULTS

A total of 34 participants (26 antimicrobial pharmacists, 3 nurses, 1 advanced clinical practitioner, 2 infectious disease consultants, 1 microbiologist and 1 clinical scientist). responsible for designing, implementing and evaluating AMS E&T in UK hospitals (five from Northern Ireland, four from Wales, two from Scotland and 23 from England) took part in virtual interviews. Key themes were: (1) The organisational context, including system-level barriers to AMS included competing organisational targets (Reflective motivation and physical opportunity) and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on activity (Physical opportunity); (2) Healthcare professionals' roles and the wider multi-disciplinary team, such that AMS roles were defined and addressed poorly in E&T (Social opportunity); and (3) The individual perception of the need for AMS E&T in hospital-based care, manifest in a perceived lack of conviction of the wider threat of AMR and the resulting need for AMS E&T (Reflective motivation).

CONCLUSION

This study has identified factors influencing implementation of AMS E&T in UK hospitals and further identified where implemented, AMS E&T did not address real-world challenges. Current AMS E&T needs to be optimised to elicit practice change, with recommendations including training and engaging the wider work-force and drawing upon theoretically-informed intervention development frameworks to inform AMS E&T to better target AMS behaviour change.

Validity of self-reported compliance and behavioural determinants of observed compliance: an application of the COM-B hand hygiene questionnaire in nine Dutch hospitals

BACKGROUND

Hand hygiene compliance (HHC) can be influenced by behavioural determinants, but knowledge on this is still scarce. The Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behaviour (COM-B) hand hygiene questionnaire was developed by Lydon et al. to gain insight in self-reported behavioural determinants and self-reported HHC.

AIM

To determine the validity of self-reported HHC, by using the COM-B questionnaire. To investigate the influence of self-reported behavioural determinants on observed HHC, while taking environmental determinants into account.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study, from September to November 2019, in nine hospitals in the Netherlands. Healthcare workers (HCW) filled in the COM-B questionnaire and direct hand hygiene observations were performed. In addition, information on environmental determinants (workload, ward category, type of hospital, infrastructure of a ward) was collected. Validity of self-reported HHC was determined by the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Univariable and multivariable regression analyses were performed to investigate the relation between behavioural- and environmental determinants and observed HHC.

FINDINGS

The ICC showed no association between self-reported HHC and observed HHC (0.04 (-0.14, 0.21)). In the univariable regression analyses, ward category and the subscales opportunity and motivation were significantly associated with observed HHC. In the multivariable regression analysis, only ward category and motivation remained significant.

CONCLUSION

The self-reported HHC is not a valid substitute for direct hand hygiene observations. The behavioural determinant motivation was significantly associated with HCC, while almost none of the environmental determinants had an effect on observed HHC. In further development of hand hygiene interventions, increasing the intrinsic motivation of HCW should get extra attention.

Examining the influences on the use of behavioural science within UK local authority public health: Qualitative thematic analysis and deductive mapping to the COM-B model and Theoretical Domains Framework

Background

Behavioural science and its contribution towards improving public health is receiving increased recognition. Yet, the translation of these insights into public health practice is under-researched. This study explored the factors influencing the use of behavioural science within public health at a local authority level.

Methods

Fourteen local authority staff (n = 13 female) in the south of England participated in semi-structured interviews, which were analysed inductively to identify key themes. These were later mapped deductively to the COM-B model and Theoretical Domains Framework.

Findings

Nine themes were identified as factors that influence the use of behavioural science in local authority public health: (1) "Limited past experience," (2) "Narrow understanding," (3) "Perceived value of behavioural science," (4) "Translational gap from theory-to-practice," (5) "No protected time," (6) "Old ways of working," (7) "Political influence and organisational culture," (8) "Relationships with key stakeholders," (9) "Access to behavioural science resources". Deductive mapping of these themes revealed that five of the COM constructs (excluding Physical Capability) and eleven of the TDF domains influenced behavioural science use, with "Social influences" and "Knowledge" being the most prominent.

Discussion

Use of behavioural science within local authority public health practice is limited and inconsistent. For it to be successfully implemented, there must be an understanding of its role and value, alongside strategies to overcome a translational gap from theory to practice. Public health teams would benefit from protected time to enable application and strategies to break old habits of using a common-sense approach. System-wide buy-in, particularly related to senior leadership and system partners is needed, which would benefit from organisational and political culture change. Training opportunities, practical resources and expert in-house support should be considered a priority across public health teams.

Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, and Hand Hygiene Behavior in Healthcare Workers: A Structural Equation Modeling

Background

Hand hygiene among healthcare workers is the leading measure to reduce healthcare-associated infections. However, hand hygiene behavior is complex and not readily understood. This study aimed to identify the determinants and the underlying mechanism of hand hygiene behavior based on the capability, opportunity, motivation-behavior model.

Methods

A self-constructed questionnaire survey was conducted among healthcare workers in Chongqing, China. Capability, opportunity, and motivation were designed as independent variables, and hand hygiene behavior was measured as a dependent variable. Internal consistency reliability analysis and confirmatory factor analysis were applied to examine the reliability and validity of the questionnaire. Structural equation modeling was performed to explore the relationships among capability, opportunity, motivation, and hand hygiene behavior.

Results

Four hundred and ninety-nine physicians and nurses were investigated. The Cronbach's α coefficients were above 0.764. Confirmatory factor analysis was confirmed with good data fitness. The structural equation modeling had a good fit (root mean square error of approximation=0.070, comparative fit index=0.960, Tucker-Lewis index=0.956). Both opportunity (β=0.265, p<0.05) and motivation (β=0.333, p<0.05) directly affected hand hygiene behavior. Both capability (β=0.194, p<0.001) and opportunity (β=0.719, p<0.001) were indirectly linked to hand hygiene behavior through motivation.

Conclusion

To improve hand hygiene behavior, more efforts need to be focused on resource provision and motivation enhancement in the future compared to training.

Cohort profile: The UK COVID-19 Public Experiences (COPE) prospective longitudinal mixed-methods study of health and well-being during the SARSCoV2 coronavirus pandemic

Public perceptions of pandemic viral threats and government policies can influence adherence to containment, delay, and mitigation policies such as physical distancing, hygienic practices, use of physical barriers, uptake of testing, contact tracing, and vaccination programs. The UK COVID-19 Public Experiences (COPE) study aims to identify determinants of health behaviour using the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation (COM-B) model using a longitudinal mixed-methods approach. Here, we provide a detailed description of the demographic and self-reported health characteristics of the COPE cohort at baseline assessment, an overview of data collected, and plans for follow-up of the cohort. The COPE baseline survey was completed by 11,113 UK adult residents (18+ years of age). Baseline data collection started on the 13th of March 2020 (10-days before the introduction of the first national COVID-19 lockdown in the UK) and finished on the 13th of April 2020. Participants were recruited via the HealthWise Wales (HWW) research registry and through social media snowballing and advertising (Facebook®, Twitter®, Instagram®). Participants were predominantly female (69%), over 50 years of age (68%), identified as white (98%), and were living with their partner (68%). A large proportion (67%) had a college/university level education, and half reported a pre-existing health condition (50%). Initial follow-up plans for the cohort included in-depth surveys at 3-months and 12-months after the first UK national lockdown to assess short and medium-term effects of the pandemic on health behaviour and subjective health and well-being. Additional consent will be sought from participants at follow-up for data linkage and surveys at 18 and 24-months after the initial UK national lockdown. A large non-random sample was recruited to the COPE cohort during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, which will enable longitudinal analysis of the determinants of health behaviour and changes in subjective health and well-being over the course of the pandemic.

A cross-sectional survey assessing the influence of theoretically informed behavioural factors on hand hygiene across seven countries during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Human hygiene behaviours influence the transmission of infectious diseases. Changing maladaptive hygiene habits has the potential to improve public health. Parents and teachers can play an important role in disinfecting surface areas and in helping children develop healthful handwashing habits. The current study aims to inform a future intervention that will help parents and teachers take up this role using a theoretically and empirically informed behaviour change model called the Capabilities-Opportunities-Motivations-Behaviour (COM-B) model.

METHODS

A cross-sectional online survey was designed to measure participants' capabilities, opportunities, and motivations to [1] increase their children's handwashing with soap and [2] increase their cleaning of surface areas. Additional items captured how often participants believed their children washed their hands. The final survey was administered early in the coronavirus pandemic (May and June 2020) to 3975 participants from Australia, China, India, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, and the United Kingdom. Participants self-identified as mums, dads, or teachers of children 5 to 10 years old. ANOVAs analyses were used to compare participant capabilities, opportunities, and motivations across countries for handwashing and surface disinfecting. Multiple regressions analyses were conducted for each country to assess the predictive relationship between the COM-B components and children's handwashing.

RESULTS

The ANOVA analyses revealed that India had the lowest levels of capability, opportunity, and motivation, for both hand hygiene and surface cleaning. The regression analyses revealed that for Australia, Indonesia, and South Africa, the capability component was the only significant predictor of children's handwashing. For India, capability and opportunity were significant. For the United Kingdom, capability and motivation were significant. Lastly, for Saudi Arabia all components were significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The discussion explores how the Behaviour Change Wheel methodology could be used to guide further intervention development with community stakeholders in each country. Of the countries assessed, India offers the greatest room for improvement, and behaviour change techniques that influence people's capability and opportunities should be prioritised there.

Identifying interventions to improve hand hygiene compliance in the intensive care unit through co-design with stakeholders

Background: Despite the effectiveness of hand hygiene (HH) for infection control, there is a lack of robust scientific data to guide how HH can be improved in intensive care units (ICUs).  The aim of this study is to use the literature, researcher, and stakeholder opinion to explicate potential interventions for improving HH compliance in the ICU, and provide an indication of the suitability of these interventions. Methods: A four-phase co-design study was designed. First, data from a previously completed systematic literature review was used in order to identify unique components of existing interventions to improve HH in ICUs. Second, a workshop was held with a panel of 10 experts to identify additional intervention components. Third, the 91 intervention components resulting from the literature review and workshop were synthesised into a final list of 21 hand hygiene interventions. Finally, the affordability, practicability, effectiveness, acceptability, side-effects/safety, and equity of each intervention was rated by 39 stakeholders (health services researchers, ICU staff, and the public). Results: Ensuring the availability of essential supplies for HH compliance was the intervention that received most approval from stakeholders. Interventions involving role models and peer-to-peer accountability and support were also well regarded by stakeholders. Education/training interventions were commonplace and popular. Punitive interventions were poorly regarded. Conclusions: Hospitals and regulators must make decisions regarding how to improve HH compliance in the absence of scientific consensus on effective methods. Using collective input and a co-design approach, the guidance developed herein may usefully support implementation of HH interventions that are considered to be effective and acceptable by stakeholders.

Healthcare workers' behaviors on infection prevention and control and their determinants during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study based on the theoretical domains framework in Wuhan, China

BACKGROUND

Infection prevention and control (IPC) measures are crucial to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to explore the levels and determinants of HCWs' IPC behaviors based on the theoretical domains framework (TDF), which has been shown to be effective in guiding behavior change.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was conducted in Wuhan, China in January 2020. Self-reported hand hygiene and droplet isolation behaviors (including the use of masks, gloves, goggles and gowns) were set as dependent variables. TDF domains and HCWs' characteristics were independent variables. Negative binomial regression analyses were performed to explore their relationships.

RESULTS

HCWs reported good IPC behaviors, while the compliance with goggle and gown use was relatively low (below 85%). Environmental context and resources domain was significantly related to hand hygiene (β = 0.018, p = 0.026), overall droplet isolation behaviors (β = 0.056, p = 0.001), goggle (β = 0.098, p = 0.001) and gown use (β = 0.101. p < 0.001). Knowledge domain was significantly related to goggle (β = 0.081, p = 0.005) and gown use (β = 0.053, p = 0.013). Emotion domain was a predictor of overall droplet isolation behaviors (β = 0.043, p = 0.016), goggle (β = 0.074, p = 0.026) and gown use (β = 0.106, p < 0.001). Social influences domain was a predictor of overall droplet isolation behaviors (β = 0.031, p = 0.029) and gown use (β = 0.039, p = 0.035). HCWs in high-risk departments had better behaviors of gown use (β = 0.158, p = 0.032). HCWs who had encountered confirmed or suspected patients reported worse behaviors of goggle (β = - 0.127, p = 0.050) and gown use (β = - 0.153, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Adequate personal protective materials and human resources, education and training, as well as supervision and role model setting are necessary to improve IPC behaviors regarding the COVID-19 pandemic.

Identifying interventions to improve hand hygiene compliance in the intensive care unit through co-design with stakeholders

Background: Despite the effectiveness of hand hygiene (HH) for infection control, there is a lack of robust scientific data to guide how HH can be improved in intensive care units (ICUs).  The aim of this study is to use the literature, researcher, and stakeholder opinion to explicate potential interventions for improving HH compliance in the ICU, and provide an indication of the suitability of these interventions. Methods: A four-phase co-design study was designed. First, data from a previously completed systematic literature review was used in order to identify unique components of existing interventions to improve HH in ICUs. Second, a workshop was held with a panel of 10 experts to identify additional intervention components. Third, the 91 intervention components resulting from the literature review and workshop were synthesised into a final list of 21 hand hygiene interventions. Finally, the affordability, practicability, effectiveness, acceptability, side-effects/safety, and equity of each intervention was rated by 39 stakeholders (health services researchers, ICU staff, and the public). Results: Ensuring the availability of essential supplies for HH compliance was the intervention that received most approval from stakeholders. Interventions involving role models and peer-to-peer accountability and support were also well regarded by stakeholders. Education/training interventions were commonplace and popular. Punitive interventions were poorly regarded. Conclusions: Hospitals and regulators must make decisions regarding how to improve HH compliance in the absence of scientific consensus on effective methods. Using collective input and a co-design approach, the guidance developed herein may usefully support implementation of HH interventions that are considered to be effective and acceptable by stakeholders.