ライフサイエンスコーパス: hand hygiene

1 d a significant and sustained improvement in hand hygiene.

2 cluding increasing awareness and encouraging hand hygiene.

3 ns and include measures such as adherence to hand hygiene.

4 ere used for a median of 72% of contacts and hand hygiene after 62% of contacts.

5 of contacts, gowns for 77% of contacts, and hand hygiene after 69% of contacts, and when universal g

6 In this evaluation of hand hygiene agents, handwashing with soap and water, 2%

7 s after hand hygiene (group A) or care after hand hygiene alone (group B) before all patient and intr

8 Hand hygiene alone does not always achieve the desired c

9 projects to improve adherence to appropriate hand hygiene and best practices for central venous cathe

10 t of a sustained high level of compliance to hand hygiene and chlorhexidine bathings, screening and i

11 ion arm was 27.2% [-0.46%, 52.3%] (increased hand hygiene and face masks).

12 connected healthcare worker did not practice hand hygiene and significantly lower when the least conn

13 or patients colonized or infected with MRSA, hand hygiene, and a change in the institutional culture

14 universal surveillance, contact precautions, hand hygiene, and institutional culture change was assoc

15 s may cross-border movements of camels, poor hand hygiene, and overnight hospital stays with respirat

16 patient care, especially the performance of hand hygiene before and after patient care; 3) rapid eva

17 Hand-hygiene behavior varies according to gender.

18 mic that resulted in substantially increased hand hygiene behaviors and resources in usual-care schoo

19 uoroquinolones) and macrolide antibiotics; a hand hygiene campaign; hospital environment inspections;

20 of alcohol-based hand sanitiser, a national hand-hygiene campaign, national auditing and inspections

21 1.71 to -0.21, P = .02), increased room-exit hand hygiene compliance (78.3% vs 62.9%, difference, 15.

22 a bundle, which was associated with improved hand hygiene compliance (pooled odds ratio [OR], 1.82; 9

23 ce prompt phase and post-intervention phase, hand hygiene compliance and nosocomial infection rates i

24 Mean hand hygiene compliance improved from 52% in phase 1 to

25 Compared with phase I, hand hygiene compliance in patient rooms improved 37% du

26 ent control measures, such as increasing the hand hygiene compliance of HCWs and disinfection rate of

27 ygiene in an adult ICU setting, and reported hand hygiene compliance rates collected via observation,

28 view all studies on interventions to improve hand hygiene compliance to evaluate existing bundles and

29 spital stay of colonized patients, increased hand hygiene compliance, and a lower ratio of health-car

30 ion, frequency of health care worker visits, hand hygiene compliance, health care-associated infectio

31 e evaluated bundled interventions to improve hand hygiene compliance.

32 ng provided effective ongoing feedback about hand hygiene compliance.

33 ns for control measures focused on improving hand hygiene compliance.

34 toring MRSA and VRE rates in ICUs; promoting hand hygiene compliance; guaranteeing adequate staffing

35 alcohol-based hand sanitizer, hand soap, and hand hygiene education.

36 contact precautions, private room/cohorting, hand hygiene, environmental cleaning, and antibiotic ste

37 Control measures included isolation, hand hygiene, environmental cleaning, and rapid diagnost

38 D preventive measures (8/8); (5) appropriate hand hygiene for everyone (7/8); (6) environmental clean

39 ions in ILI during weeks 4-6 in the mask and hand hygiene group, compared with the control group, ran

40 to receive care with nonsterile gloves after hand hygiene (group A) or care after hand hygiene alone

41 infection control strategies (e.g., routine hand hygiene, implementation of infection-specific preve

42 sal chlorhexidine body-washing combined with hand hygiene improvement for 6 months (phase 2), followe

43 es that evaluated an intervention to improve hand hygiene in an adult ICU setting, and reported hand

44 emonstrates that best practice for improving hand hygiene in ICUs remains unestablished.

45 terature describing interventions to improve hand hygiene in ICUs, to evaluate the quality of the ext

46 sition of VRE, and improving compliance with hand hygiene in the hemodialysis unit may decrease the r

47 nts focused on 5 areas of infection control: hand hygiene, injection safety and medication handling,

48 tion in hazard of infection in the increased hand hygiene intervention arm was 37.0% [8.3%, 57.8%], w

49 The hand hygiene intervention did not reduce the number of a

50 Hand hygiene is a key measure in preventing infections.

51 failure mode and effects analysis including hand hygiene, isolation of infection, vital signs, medic

52 revention of nosocomial infections, adequate hand hygiene, isolation of patients who harbor resistant

53 We observed hand hygiene lapses, inadequate infection documentation,

54 care providers used clean gloves, gowns, and hand hygiene less frequently than required for contacts

55 We hypothesize that glove use after hand hygiene may further decrease these infections.

56 These findings suggest that face masks and hand hygiene may reduce respiratory illnesses in shared

57 cipant characteristics, experimental design, hand hygiene measurement, intervention characteristics,

58 Our goal is to determine the impact of hand hygiene noncompliance among peripatetic (eg, highly

59 We then compared the effects of hand hygiene noncompliance as a function of connectednes

60 Neither face mask use and hand hygiene nor face mask use alone was associated with

61 sink and hand sanitizer dispenser to record hand hygiene of HCWs.

62 ation between use of antiseptic products for hand hygiene of staff and reductions in nosocomial infec

63 terized voice prompts for failure to perform hand hygiene on room exit; and phase III was electronic

64 s/gloves were sampled at room exit (prior to hand hygiene or glove removal) and then evaluated for th

65 1 of 3 groups-face mask use, face masks with hand hygiene, or control- for 6 weeks.

66 unsolved but well-identified causes such as hand hygiene, overuse of catheters, and to a lesser exte

67 Improved hand hygiene plus unit-wide chlorhexidine body-washing r

68 icted that a 12% improvement in adherence to hand-hygiene policies might have compensated for staff s

69 acerbations compared with the schools' usual hand hygiene practices (P = .132).

70 Changes in hand hygiene practices in acute care settings from the t

71 sthma exacerbations more than schools' usual hand hygiene practices.

72 Glove use after hand hygiene prior to patient and line contact is associ

73 vering attention to adherence to appropriate hand hygiene procedures; and attention to the details of

74 mented in an iterative fashion, including 1) hand hygiene program with refresher education campaign,

75 During the 16-week prefeedback period, hand hygiene rates were less than 10% (3933/60 542) and

76 study examined whether use of face masks and hand hygiene reduced the incidence of influenza-like ill

77 One of two hand hygiene regimens randomly assigned for four consecu

78 aspects of prevention, including education, hand hygiene, sterile technique, skin cleansing, choice

79 ve care unit rooms; environmental aspects of hand hygiene, such as water risks, sink design/location,

80 Proper hand hygiene, the use of surgical masks, appropriate ant

81 hen video auditors observed a HCW performing hand hygiene upon entering/exiting, they assigned a pass

82 Hand hygiene was encouraged and compliance audited.

83 Hand hygiene was measured during a 16-week period of rem

84 g methods to adjust for confounders, such as hand hygiene, when examining the effect of disinfecting

85 We evaluated healthcare worker (HCW) hand hygiene with the use of remote video auditing with

86 ecreasing the patient:HCW ratio or improving hand hygiene would decrease the EP to 3%.