ライフサイエンスコーパス: handwashing

1 products for general cleaning, laundry, and handwashing.

2 any STH (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.29-0.98), as was handwashing after defecation (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.24-0.90)

3 reptile carriage of salmonella necessitates handwashing after handling of animals.

4 Strict handwashing also significantly reduced the infection rat

5 Among those with a designated handwashing area near the home, soap or ash were more fr

6 such as self-reported dietary diversity and handwashing, as well as infant survival were improved.

7 aviour, rather than knowledge, could improve handwashing behaviour in rural India.

8 t maximised handwashing intention, monitored handwashing behaviour, provided tailored feedback, reinf

9 ne questionnaire on handwashing would affect handwashing behaviour.

10 Handwashing, both before eating (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.26-0.

11 ed households weekly for 1 year to encourage handwashing by residents in soap households and to recor

12 gic nursery design and staffing; emphasis on handwashing compliance; minimizing central venous cathet

13 e internet intervention designed to increase handwashing could have an important effect in reduction

14 sion of any particular strain of MRSA nor in handwashing frequency between management phases.

15 fection control measures (patient isolation, handwashing, glove use, and appropriate gown use) and im

16 and glove isolation was compared with strict handwashing in pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) pati

17 leading cause of child death, improvement in handwashing in the household reduced the incidence of di

18 omated web-based intervention that maximised handwashing intention, monitored handwashing behaviour,

19 ials have further underscored the benefit of handwashing interventions.

20 However, the role of handwashing is debated, and no good randomised evidence

21 atory infections, but prevalence of adequate handwashing is low.

22 Adequate handwashing, isolation of carriers, and barrier techniqu

23 , but were equally clean, and more often had handwashing materials.

24 into individual water treatment, sanitation, handwashing, nutrition, combined WSH, combined nutrition

25 ient power to assess the impact of household handwashing on diarrhea in infants.

26 each patient was randomized to either strict handwashing or protective gown and glove isolation inter

27 Glove use with handwashing prior to and after contact with potential co

28 Infants living in households that received handwashing promotion and plain soap had 39% fewer days

29 n 5 years living in households that received handwashing promotion and plain soap had 42% fewer days

30 15 years living in households that received handwashing promotion and plain soap had a 53% lower inc

31 s in households that received plain soap and handwashing promotion had a 50% lower incidence of pneum

32 sed controlled trial to assess the effect of handwashing promotion with soap on the incidence of acut

33 In neighbourhoods with handwashing promotion, 300 households each were assigned

34 n, we randomly assigned 25 neighbourhoods to handwashing promotion; 11 neighbourhoods (306 households

35 ve protective isolation protocol or a strict handwashing protocol.

36 reatment (30% vs 44%, P < .0001) and correct handwashing technique (25% vs 51%, P < .0001) in interve

37 ucts and juices, and about the importance of handwashing to prevent the spread of diarrhoeal illness,

38 Handwashing to prevent transmission of respiratory tract

39 three basic principles of infection control: handwashing, vaccination of health care workers, and pro

40 three basic principles of infection control: handwashing, vaccination of health care workers, and pro

41 ning and gloving was 82% and compliance with handwashing was 76% (compared with 22% before study [p <

42 Increased compliance with handwashing was associated with a reduction in nosocomia

43 rtain non-pharmaceutical behaviours (such as handwashing) were deterrents to vaccination.

44 certain personal protective behaviours (eg, handwashing) were more commonly adopted than social dist

45 Handwashing with chlorine-containing towels was increasi

46 Handwashing with daily bathing also prevents impetigo.

47 were exclusive breastfeeding (self-report), handwashing with soap (observation), oral rehydration sa

48 Weekly visits in 25 neighborhoods to promote handwashing with soap after defecation and before prepar

49 In this evaluation of hand hygiene agents, handwashing with soap and water, 2% chlorhexidine glucon

50 The primary outcome was the proportion of handwashing with soap at key events (after defecation, a

51 At 6 weeks' follow-up, handwashing with soap at key events was more common in t

52 Handwashing with soap at key events was rare at baseline

53 is study shows that substantial increases in handwashing with soap can be achieved using a scalable i

54 Handwashing with soap could substantially reduce diarrho

55 Handwashing with soap prevents the two clinical syndrome

56 d the shortened intervention, the proportion handwashing with soap was 29% (SD 9) in the intervention

57 the 6-month follow-up visit, the proportion handwashing with soap was 37% (SD 7) in the intervention

58 measures, including exclusive breastfeeding, handwashing with soap, correct use of oral rehydration s

59 nge communication to promote stool disposal, handwashing with soap, water treatment, protected explor

60 mean removal rate was 94.6% (SD = 6.5%) for handwashing with soap-and-water (n = 28) and 8.7% (SD =

61 We concluded that handwashing with soap-and-water removes 80% more DEHP th

62 i-(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP) on hands by handwashing with soap-and-water versus water-only.

63 th soap-and-water removes 80% more DEHP than handwashing with water alone, and may be a cost-effectiv

64 assess whether the baseline questionnaire on handwashing would affect handwashing behaviour.

65 an internet-delivered intervention to modify handwashing would reduce the number of RTIs among adults

66 We hypothesized that a water, sanitation, handwashing (WSH), and nutritional intervention would sl