Hand Hygiene Practices and the Risk of Human Coronavirus Infections in a UK Community Cohort

Impact of COVID-19 on the degree of compliance with hand hygiene: a repeated cross-sectional study

Hand hygiene (HH) is the paramount measure used to prevent healthcare-associated infections. A repeated cross-sectional study was undertaken with direct observation of the degree of compliance on HH of healthcare personnel during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Between, 2018-2019, 9,083 HH opportunities were considered, and 5,821 in 2020-2022. Chi squared tests were used to identify associations. The crude and adjusted odds ratios were used along with a logistic regression model for statistical analyses. Compliance on HH increased significantly (p < 0.001) from 54.5% (95% CI: 53.5, 55.5) to 70.1% (95% CI: 68.9, 71.2) during the COVID-19 pandemic. This increase was observed in four of the five key moments of HH established by the World Health Organization (WHO) (p < 0.05), except at moment 4. The factors that were significantly and independently associated with compliance were the time period considered, type of healthcare-personnel, attendance at training sessions, knowledge of HH and WHO guidelines, and availability of hand disinfectant alcoholic solution in pocket format. Highest HH compliance occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic, reflecting a positive change in healthcare-personnel's behaviour regarding HH recommendations.

Reduction of acute respiratory infections in day-care by non-pharmaceutical interventions: a narrative review

Objective

Children who start in day-care have 2-4 times as many respiratory infections compared to children who are cared for at home, and day-care staff are among the employees with the highest absenteeism. The extensive new knowledge that has been generated in the COVID-19 era should be used in the prevention measures we prioritize. The purpose of this narrative review is to answer the questions: Which respiratory viruses are the most significant in day-care centers and similar indoor environments? What do we know about the transmission route of these viruses? What evidence is there for the effectiveness of different non-pharmaceutical prevention measures?

Design

Literature searches with different terms related to respiratory infections in humans, mitigation strategies, viral transmission mechanisms, and with special focus on day-care, kindergarten or child nurseries, were conducted in PubMed database and Web of Science. Searches with each of the main viruses in combination with transmission, infectivity, and infectious spread were conducted separately supplemented through the references of articles that were retrieved.

Results

Five viruses were found to be responsible for ≈95% of respiratory infections: rhinovirus, (RV), influenza virus (IV), respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), coronavirus (CoV), and adenovirus (AdV). Novel research, emerged during the COVID-19 pandemic, suggests that most respiratory viruses are primarily transmitted in an airborne manner carried by aerosols (microdroplets).

Conclusion

Since airborne transmission is dominant for the most common respiratory viruses, the most important preventive measures consist of better indoor air quality that reduces viral concentrations and viability by appropriate ventilation strategies. Furthermore, control of the relative humidity and temperature, which ensures optimal respiratory functionality and, together with low resident density (or mask use) and increased time outdoors, can reduce the occurrence of respiratory infections.

Handwashing adherence during the COVID-19 pandemic: A longitudinal study based on protection motivation theory

RATIONALE

The associations between the number of COVID-19 cases/deaths and subsequent uptake of protective behaviors may reflect cognitive and behavioral responses to threat-relevant information.

OBJECTIVE

Applying protection motivation theory (PMT), this study explored whether the number of total COVID-19 cases/deaths and general anxiety were associated with cross-situational handwashing adherence and whether these associations were mediated by PMT-specific self-regulatory cognitions (threat appraisal: perceived vulnerability, perceived illness severity; coping appraisal: self-efficacy, response efficacy, response costs).

METHOD

The study (#NCT04367337) was conducted in March-September 2020 among 1256 adults residing in 14 countries. Self-reports on baseline general anxiety levels, handwashing adherence across 12 situations, and PMT-related constructs were collected using an online survey at two points in time, four weeks apart. Values of COVID-19 cases and deaths were retrieved twice for each country (one week prior to the individual data collection).

RESULTS

Across countries and time, levels of adherence to handwashing guidelines were high. Path analysis indicated that smaller numbers of COVID-19 cases/deaths (Time 0; T0) were related to stronger self-efficacy (T1), which in turn was associated with higher handwashing adherence (T3). Lower general anxiety (T1) was related to better adherence (T3), with this effect mediated by higher response efficacy (T1, T3) and lower response cost (T3). However, higher general anxiety (T1) was related to better adherence via higher illness severity (T1, T3). General anxiety was unrelated to COVID-19 indicators.

CONCLUSIONS

We found a complex pattern of associations between the numbers of COVID-19 cases/deaths, general anxiety, PMT variables, and handwashing adherence at the early stages of the pandemic. Higher general anxiety may enable threat appraisal (perceived illness severity), but it may hinder coping appraisal (response efficacy and response costs). The indicators of the trajectory of the pandemic (i.e., the smaller number of COVID-19 cases) may be indirectly associated with higher handwashing adherence via stronger self-efficacy.

Facilitating hand hygiene in displacement camps during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative assessment of a novel handwashing stand and hygiene promotion package

BACKGROUND

Handwashing with soap is critical for the prevention of diarrhoeal diseases and outbreak related diseases, including interrupting the transmission of COVID-19. People living in large displacement settings are particularly vulnerable to such outbreaks, however, practicing handwashing is typically challenging in these contexts.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative assessment of the implementation of a combined intervention to facilitate handwashing behaviour in displacement camps and in surrounding communities in Bangladesh, Ethiopia and the Democratic Republic of Congo during the COVID-19 pandemic. The intervention comprised a 'hardware' infrastructural component (provision of the Oxfam Handwashing Station) and a 'software' hygiene promotion package (Mum's Magic Hands). We used programmatic logbooks, interviews with implementation staff and focus group discussions with crisis-affected populations to assess the use, feasibility and acceptability of the intervention.

RESULTS

Both components of the intervention were viewed as novel and appealing by implementing staff and crisis-affected populations across the study sites. The acceptability of the handwashing station could be improved by redesigning the tap and legs, exploring local supply chain options, and by providing a greater number of facilities. The implementation of the hygiene promotion package varied substantially by country making it challenging to evaluate and compare. A greater focus on community engagement could address misconceptions, barriers related to the intuitiveness of the handwashing station design, and willingness to participate in the hygiene promotion component.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of a 'hardware' and 'software' intervention in these settings appeared to facilitate both access and use of handwashing facilities. The acceptability of the combined intervention was partially because a great deal of effort had been put into their design. However, even when delivering well-designed interventions, there are many contextual aspects that need to be considered, as well as unintended consequences which can affect the acceptability of an intervention.

Factors predicting proper handwashing practice amidst the COVID-19 pandemic in India: a field-based cross-sectional study

Proper handwashing is one of the effective ways to prevent many communicable diseases, including COVID-19. We explored the handwashing practices in a rural Indian population before the probable third wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. A data collection schedule was administered to eligible adult members of a rural community, selected by multi-stage sampling, to assess their pattern and practice of handwashing. All 176 respondents washed their hands after defecation, 82.4 and 80.7% washed hands after urination and before taking food, respectively, while 68.2% of respondents washed hands after coming back from outdoors. Among those who handwashed, 82.9% used soap water after defecation; 46.2, 45.8 and 50.8% washed hands with soap water after urination, before taking food and after visiting outdoors, respectively. Only a quarter (24.4%) of all the participants used soap water for handwashing consistently after defecation, after urination, before taking food and after coming home. The more educated, those coming from higher socioeconomic stratum and working from home, were more likely to report proper handwashing practice. Handwashing, as recommended by health agencies, for restraining COVID-19 infection, was not noticed in the majority of the participants. Better awareness of handwashing is recommended to help restrain COVID-19 in the Indian population.

The cost-effectiveness of common strategies for the prevention of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in universities

Background

Most universities that re-open in the United States (US) for in-person instruction have implemented the Centers for Disease Prevention and Control (CDC) guidelines. The value of additional interventions to prevent the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is unclear. We calculated the cost-effectiveness and cases averted of each intervention in combination with implementing the CDC guidelines.

Methods

We built a decision-analytic model to examine the cost-effectiveness of interventions to re-open universities. The interventions included implementing the CDC guidelines alone and in combination with 1) a symptom-checking mobile application, 2) university-provided standardized, high filtration masks, 3) thermal cameras for temperature screening, 4) one-time entry (‘gateway’) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing, and 5) weekly PCR testing. We also modeled a package of interventions (‘package intervention’) that combines the CDC guidelines with using the symptom-checking mobile application, standardized masks, gateway PCR testing, and weekly PCR testing. The direct and indirect costs were calculated in 2020 US dollars. We also provided an online interface that allows the user to change model parameters.

Results

All interventions averted cases of COVID-19. When the prevalence of actively infectious cases reached 0.1%, providing standardized, high filtration masks saved money and improved health relative to implementing the CDC guidelines alone and in combination with using the symptom-checking mobile application, thermal cameras, and gateway testing. Compared with standardized masks, weekly PCR testing cost $9.27 million (95% Credible Interval [CrI]: cost-saving-$77.36 million)/QALY gained. Compared with weekly PCR testing, the ‘package’ intervention cost $137,877 (95% CrI: $3,108-$19.11 million)/QALY gained. At both a prevalence of 1% and 2%, the ‘package’ intervention saved money and improved health compared to all the other interventions.

Conclusions

All interventions were effective at averting infection from COVID-19. However, when the prevalence of actively infectious cases in the community was low, only standardized, high filtration masks clearly provided value.

Impact of Personal Protection Habits on the Spread of Pandemics: Insights from an Agent-Based Model

BACKGROUND

After several waves of spread of the COVID-19 pandemic, countries around the world are struggling to regain their economies by slowly lifting mobility restrictions and social distance measures applied during the crisis. Meanwhile, recent studies provide compelling evidence on how contact distancing, the use of face masks, and handwashing habits can reduce the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission. In this context, we investigated the effect that these personal protection habits can have in preventing new waves of contagion.

METHODS

We extended an agent-based COVID-19 epidemic model in a simulated community to incorporate the mechanisms of these aforementioned personal care habits and measure their incidence in person-to-person transmission. A full factorial experiment design was performed to illustrate the extent to which the interplay between these personal habits is effective in mitigating the spread of disease. A global sensitivity analysis was performed on the parameters that control these habits to further validate the results.

RESULTS

We found that observing physical distance is the dominant habit in reducing disease transmission, although adopting either or both of the other two habits is necessary to some extent to suppress a new outbreak entirely. When physical distance is not observed, adherence to the use of masks or handwashing has a significant decrease in infections and mortality, but the epidemic still unfolds. We also found that in all scenarios, the combined effect of adhering to the three habits is more powerful than adopting them separately.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that a broad adherence of the population to voluntary self-care habits would help contain unfold of new outbreaks. The purpose of our model is illustrative and contributes to ratify the importance of urging citizens to adopt the amalgam of personal care habits as a primary collective protection measure to prevent communities from returning to confinements, while immunisation is carried out in late stages of the pandemic.

A novel approach for evaluating contact patterns and risk mitigation strategies for COVID-19 in English primary schools with application of structured expert judgement

Personal contacts drive COVID-19 infections. After being closed (23 March 2020) UK primary schools partially re-opened on 1 June 2020 with social distancing and new risk mitigation strategies. We conducted a structured expert elicitation of teachers to quantify primary school contact patterns and how contact rates changed upon re-opening with risk mitigation measures in place. These rates, with uncertainties, were determined using a performance-based algorithm. We report mean number of contacts per day for four cohorts within schools, with associated 90% confidence ranges. Prior to lockdown, younger children (Reception and Year 1) made 15 contacts per day [range 8.35] within school, older children (Year 6) 18 contacts [range 5.55], teaching staff 25 contacts [range 4.55] and non-classroom staff 11 contacts [range 2.27]. After re-opening, the mean number of contacts was reduced by 53% for young children, 62% for older children, 60% for classroom staff and 64% for other staff. Contacts between teaching and non-teaching staff reduced by 80%. The distributions of contacts per person are asymmetric with heavy tail reflecting a few individuals with high contact numbers. Questions on risk mitigation and supplementary structured interviews elucidated how new measures reduced daily contacts in-school and contribute to infection risk reduction.