Heather Loveday

epic3: National Evidence-Based Guidelines for Preventing Healthcare-Associated Infections in NHS Hospitals in England

Executive Summary National evidence-based guidelines for preventing healthcare-associated infections (HCAI) in National Health Service (NHS) hospitals in England were commissioned by the Department of Health (DH) and developed during 1998-2000 by a nurse-led multi-professional team of researchers and specialist clinicians. Following extensive consultation, they were published in January 2001.1 These guidelines describe the precautions healthcare workers should take in three areas: standard principles for preventing HCAI, which include hospital environmental hygiene, hand hygiene, the use of personal protective equipment, and the safe use and disposal of sharps; preventing infections associated with the use of short-term indwelling urethral catheters; and preventing infections associated with central venous catheters. The evidence for these guidelines was identified by multiple systematic reviews of experimental and non-experimental research and expert opinion as reflected in systematically identified professional, national and international guidelines, which were formally assessed by a validated appraisal process. In 2003, we developed complementary national guidelines for preventing HCAI in primary and community care on behalf of the National Collaborating Centre for Nursing and Supportive Care (National Institute for Healthand Clinical Excellence).2 A cardinal feature of evidence-based guidelines is that they are subject to timely review in order that new research evidence and technological advances can be identified, appraised and, if shown to be effective in preventing HCAI, incorporated into amended guidelines. Periodically updating the evidence base and guideline recommendations is essential in order to maintain their validity and authority. Consequently, the DH commissioned a review of new evidence published following the last systematic reviews. We have now updated the evidence base for making infection prevention and control recommendations. A critical assessment of the updated evidence indicated that the original epic guidelines published in 2001 remain robust, relevant and appropriate but that adjustments need to be made to some guideline recommendations following a synopsis of the evidence underpinning the guidelines. These updated national guidelines (epic2) provide comprehensive recommendations for preventing HCAI in hospitals and other acute care settings based on the best currently available evidence. Because this is not always the best possible evidence, we have included a suggested agenda for further research in each section of the guidelines. National evidence-based guidelines are broad principles of best practice which need to be integrated into local practice guidelines. To monitor implementation, we have suggested key audit criteria for each section of recommendations. Clinically effective infection prevention and control practice is an essential feature of protecting patients. By incorporating these guidelines into routine daily clinical practice, patient safety can be enhanced and the risk of patients acquiring an infection during episodes of healthcare in NHS hospitals in England can be minimised.

Optimisation of infection prevention and control in acute health care by use of behaviour change: a systematic review

Changes in the behaviour of health-care workers (HCWs) are required to improve adherence to infection prevention and control (IPC) guidelines. Despite heavy investment in strategies to change behaviour, effectiveness has not been adequately assessed. We did a systematic review to assess the effectiveness and sustainability of interventions to change IPC behaviour and assessed exploratory literature for barriers to and facilitators of behaviour change. 21 studies published from 1999 to 2011 met our inclusion criteria: seven intervention studies and 14 exploratory studies. Of the intervention studies none explicitly incorporated psychological theory and only two contained elements of social marketing in the design, although five addressed sustainability. All elicited behaviour change, reduction in infection risk, or both. The exploratory studies identified social and cultural factors that affect the IPC behaviour of HCWs. To improve the standard of research and broaden the evidence base, we recommend that quality criteria are added to existing systematic review guidelines to enable the inclusion of qualitative research and to ensure robust design, implementation, and reporting of interventions.

Public perception and the social and microbiological significance of uniforms in the prevention and control of healthcare-associated infections: an evidence review

Background: There is significant public concern in England about health carers wearing uniform in public places and that contaminated uniforms may contribute to the spread of healthcare-associated infections (HCAI). Evidence of a link between contaminated uniforms and HCAI, or that wearing uniforms in public spaces may contribute to the spread of infection from the healthcare environment to the wider community, has not previously been systematically assessed. Methods: A comprehensive review was conducted that focused on patient perceptions of the significance and infection risks of uniforms and microbiological and clinical evidence of the infection risks to patients from contaminated uniforms. Results: Uniforms play an important role in the publics perception of healthcare professionals. This is constructed from social and cultural images leading patients to judge the professionalism and trustworthiness of practitioners based on the clothes they wear. The colour and design of uniforms may reinforce socially constructed concepts of cleanliness that result in unachievable expectations. Evidence directly related to the laundering of uniforms is limited. Small scale studies show that uniforms and white coats become progressively contaminated during clinical care and most microbial contamination originates from the wearer of the uniform. Although some studies theorise that uniforms may transmit HCAI, no studies demonstrated this in practice. A small number of studies evaluated the phases of the wash cycle in hospital laundries for patient linen but not uniforms. They indicate that micro-organisms are removed and killed during laundering, and dilution during washing and rinsing is important. Significant reductions in micro-organisms occur at lower temperatures more commonly used in home laundering. A small number of studies show that home laundering provides effective decontamination. We found no recent studies that accounted for advances in domestic washing machine and detergent technology or that addressed the theoretical infection risk linked with wearing uniforms in public places. Conclusion: Despite the limited amount and quality of the evidence, the general publics perception is that uniforms pose an infection risk when worn inside and outside clinical settings. This is reinforced by media comment and a lack of clear, accessible information and may have a damaging effect on the relationship between professionals and patients and the public image of healthcare workers. There is no good evidence to suggest uniforms are a significant risk, that home laundering is inferior to commercial processing of uniforms or that it presents a hazard in terms of cross-contamination of other items in the wash-load with hospital pathogens. It is essential that the evidence is considered in a balanced way and not over-emphasised in the development of uniform policy and that the general principles of infection control are stressed.

Adherence to Antiretroviral Therapy: Appropriate Use of Self-Reporting in Clinical Practice

Abstract Purpose: This study investigated the factors that may affect adherence to antiretroviral therapy in people with HIV infection and compared the use of three self-report tools to determine client adherence. Method: A descriptive, cross-sectional study of 260 HIV-infected clients attending nine HIV outpatient centers in England was conducted using researcher-administered instruments. Self-reports of adherence were assessed using the Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS), Reported Adherence to Medication Scale (RAM), and the Patient Adjustment to Medication Scale (PAM). Results: Univariate analysis of clients’ self-reports indicated a number of associations with adherence. Significant associations with less adherent behavior identified by two or more self-report tools were the reported use of recreational drugs, p = .001; living alone, p = .041; feeling depressed, p = .02; being influenced by the media, p = .037; and lack of a close confidant, p = .037. Greater adherence was associated with clients reporting a positive mental attitude to HIV infection, p = .038. Principal component analysis (PCA) of each self-report tool identified two well-recognized constructs: intentional nonadherence and nonintentional nonadherence. In addition, a third construct of following instructions was identified from PAM, a scale developed by the authors. Subsequent regression analysis failed to confirm the associations with adherence suggested by the univariate analysis. Conclusion: This study suggests that the design and use of self-report tools to identify client’s adherence to complex antiretroviral regimens may need to measure individual constructs of adherence to accurately assess adherence behavior.

The epic project. Updating the evidence-base for national evidence-based guidelines for preventing healthcare-associated infections in NHS hospitals in England: a report with recommendations:

The evidence underpinning infection prevention and control guidelines requires updating at regular intervals as advances in technology and new research findings may influence guideline recommendations. The evidence-base for national guidelines published in 20011 for preventing healthcare-associated infections in hospitals in England has recently been updated using systematic review methods. A critical assessment of the updated evidence indicates that the current guidelines remain robust, relevant and appropriate, but that adjustments need to be made to some guideline recommendations. Periodically updating the evidence base and making necessary adjustments to guideline recommendations is essential, in order to maintain their validity and authority.

The misuse and overuse of non-sterile gloves: application of an audit tool to define the problem

Background: The use of non-sterile gloves (NSG) has become routine in the delivery of health care, often for procedures for which they are not required; their use may increase the risk of cross contamination and is generally not integrated into hand hygiene audit. This paper describes a small-scale application and validation of an observational audit tool devised to identify inappropriate use of NSG and potential for cross contamination. Methods: Two observers simultaneously observed the use of NSG during episodes of care in an acute hospital setting. The inter-rater reliability (IRR) of the audit tool was measured corrected for chance agreement using Kappa. Results: A total of 22 episodes of care using NSG were observed. In 68.6% (24/35) of procedures there was no contact with blood/body fluid; in 54.3% (19/35) NSG-use was inappropriate. The IRR was 100% for eight of 12 components of the tool. For hand hygiene before and after NSG removal it was 82% (Kappa = 0.72) and 95% (Kappa = 0.87). Conclusions: In this small-scale application of a glove-use audit tool we demonstrated over-use and misuse of NSG and potential for cross transmission on gloved hands. The audit tool provides an effective mechanism for integrating glove use into the audit of hand hygiene behaviour.

epic3: revised recommendation for intravenous catheter and catheter site care

epic3: revised recommendation for intravenous catheter and catheter site care H.P. Loveday *, J.A. Wilson , J. Prieto , M.H. Wilcox c Richard Wells Research Centre, College of Nursing, Midwifery and Healthcare, University of West London, London, UK b Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK Microbiology and Infection Control, Leeds Teaching Hospitals and University of Leeds, Leeds, UK

Using a blended e-learning model to provide accessible infection prevention and control training for NHS staff: The NHSU/TVU/Intuition approach

ver the past two decades, healthcare-associated infections (HCAI) have emerged as a significant threat to high quality health care. The technological advances made in the treatment of many diseases and disorders are being undermined by the transmission of infections within healthcare settings, especially the emergence of antimicrobial resistant strains of Staphylococcus aureus and enterococci that are now endemic in some healthcare environments. The financial and personal costs of HCAI in terms of the economic consequences to the National Health Service (NHS) and the physical, social and psychological costs to patients and their relatives have increased both government and public awareness of the risks associated with healthcare interventions and in particular the consequences of HCAI. The risk of acquiring HCAI continues to attract intense media interest. Reports of dirty hospitals and stories of healthcare workers failing to observe even the most rudimentary hygiene and other infection prevention and control measures are causing profound anxiety among service users. The public is fast losing confidence in the NHS to safely care for them and this dissatisfaction has propelled HCAI to the top of an increasingly urgent political healthcare agenda. The Department of Health (DH) has focused a number of initiatives on combating HCAI, including the development of national evidence-based infection prevention and control guidelines for acute and primary care settings (Pratt et al, 2001; Pellowe et al, 2003), a research programme to identify a range of effective strategies for combating antimicrobial resistance and more recently setting out a strategy for reducing HCAI and improving environmental hygiene in healthcare settings (DH, 2002; DH, 2004). DH strategy emphasises the importance of ensuring that infection prevention and control training is included in the induction programme for all NHS staff, both clinical and nonclinical, including agency and locum staff, and that this training becomes part of their continuing personal development plans. Professor Christine Beasley, the chief nursing officer at the DH has since taken responsibility for actualising many aspects of this strategy, especially ensuring that the required training is made available for all 1.3 million NHS staff by the end of 2005. Providing that training became the responsibility of the NHS University (NHSU), which commissioned the Richard Wells Research Centre at Thames Valley University London (TVU) along with their Dublin-based educational development partner, Intuition Publishing Ltd, to develop an appropriate and accessible state-of-the-art blended e-learning training programme. In this article, we describe how we designed and structured the programme so that it can be used as an essential tool in orientation/induction, staff development and in-service education programmes for all NHS staff.

Informing the Future – a review of nursing roles and responsibilities in community infection control (part two):

I. Princ@aILeciurer (Re~earch), Richard Wells Research Cenire, Thames Valley Uniuer~iiy London W5 2E.S 2. Senior Leclurer. Richard We& Research Centre, Thames Volley University London W5 2BS 3. Independent naining and Research Consultant Ashmanhaugh. No#oIk 4. Principal Leclurer and Deputy DirectoA Uichard Wels Research Cenlre. Thames Valley University London W52B5 5. Communily Infeclion Control Nurse. Department of Pubhc Health, ShropJhire Heaflh Aulhority 6. Research Assislanl. Richard W e h Research Centre, Thames VMey Universily London W5 2BS Z Pro/essor of Nursing and Direclo< Richard Wels Research Centre, Thames Valey University London W5 2BS

Public perceptions of the use of gloves by healthcare workers and comparison with perceptions of student nurses

Introduction: There is evidence that non-sterile clinical gloves (NSCG) are over-used by healthcare workers (HCWs) and are associated with cross-contamination. This study aimed to determine attitudes of student nurses and members of the public to the use of NSCG. Methods: Third-year student nurses completed a questionnaire indicating tasks for which they would wear NSCG and influences on their decision. Correlations between tasks were identified using exploratory factor analysis. An online survey of the public was conducted using snowball sampling method. Results: Sixty-seven students completed the questionnaire; they indicated use of NSCG for low-risk tasks and reported their own judgement as the main influence on their decision to wear them. Correlated tasks included ‘perceived to be risky’ or ‘definitive indication for gloves/no gloves’ and ‘related to personal hygiene’. A total of 142 respondents completed the public survey. They reported being uncomfortable with HCW wearing gloves for some personal tasks, e.g. assisting to toilet and dressing, but 94% preferred their use for washing ‘private parts’; 29% had observed inappropriate glove use by HCWs during recent contact with healthcare. Conclusion: Student nurses reported using NSCG routinely for tasks for which they are neither required nor recommended. The public observe inappropriate glove use and are uncomfortable with their use for some personal tasks.