Lessons learnt from complementary test sites

Since the start of the testing phase of the WHO Multimodal Hand Hygiene Implementation Strategy, complementary test sites (CTS) were able to access the entire range of tools included in the Pilot Implementation Pack following registration through an interactive web platform created for this purpose. Although CTS did not receive direct monitoring by the First Global Patient Safety Challenge team, a process of evaluation has been undertaken when the implementation phase reached an advanced stage. A structured framework was developed including three levels: level I, the mapping exercise; level II, quantitative evaluation; and level III, qualitative evaluation. The mapping exercise was conducted with the use of an online form and allowed to collect general information about the health- care settings, their progress in the implementation of the WHO Strategy and which tools had been adopted or adapted. Sites at advanced/semi-advanced stages of implementation and which had used most of the WHO tools underwent evaluation levels II and III through a semi-structured telephone interview with the coordinators. The interview included both open and ranking questions (7-point Likert scale) on different components of the WHO Strategy and the Pilot Implementation Pack. The objective was to receive feedback on the drawbacks and advantages of the implementation of the strategy, feasibility of alcohol-based handrub local production, and the validity and obstacles encountered in the use of the tools. For the purpose of quantitative evaluation, the coordinators were requested to send the available data on key indicators e.g. hand hygiene compliance, alcohol-based handrub and soap consumption, as well as the results of the knowledge/perception/structure surveys. Level II evaluation is ongoing.

A total of 114 complete responses were received for the level I survey and concerned both single sites and networks of health- care settings. Forty-seven coordinators from the advanced and semi-advanced sites, representing 230 health-care settings from Egypt, France, Italy, Malta, Malaysia, Mongolia, Spain, and Viet Nam, participated in the level II and III evaluation.

21.5.2.1 Comments on the WHO Multimodal Hand Hygiene Improvement Strategy and the Guide to Implementation General comments by most coordinators on the WHO Multimodal Hand Hygiene Improvement Strategy indicate that it is comprehensive and detailed, and its action plan very helpful to guide practically the local implementation. For these reasons, it was considered to be a successful model suitable to be used also for other infection control interventions. However,

Some examples of the local adaptation of the strategy are the local production of posters, brochures, training films, badges and gadgets, organization of focus groups on glove use, use of the fingerprint method for educational purposes, and the involvement of patients and visitors in hand hygiene promotion.

21.5.2.2 Comments on specific elements of the WHO Strategy

System change. System change was considered a very

important component of the WHO Strategy (median score 7, range 4-7). As far as handwashing was concerned, in some cases where major infrastructure deficiencies were present (e.g. lack of sinks and paper towels), these could not be completely overcome, mainly due to lack of resources.

Forty-six CTS adopted locally-produced WHO-recommended handrub formulations produced either at the hospital pharmacy or in a centralized facility. In the sites where handrub was already in use, the system was strengthened through the increase in the number of dispensers and the use of different types of dispensers.

Reported long-term obstacles to system change included staff subconsciously resistant to using handrub (mainly for self-protection reasons), leakage problem with liquid solutions, rumours about handrubs causing skin cancer, and allergic reactions.

Education. This component was considered of major

importance for the success of the campaign and the WHO tools were widely used with the addition of local data in most cases. HCWs who had previously received less education expressed the most interest. In many cases, traditional educational sessions with slide-shows were used, but other methods such as interactive sessions and practical sessions on hand hygiene technique were also adopted. The “My five moments for hand hygiene” concept was perceived as the key winning message of the Strategy and the visual impact of the educational tools and the training film were highly appreciated.

Major obstacles were the limited time availability of HCWs beyond the work shifts and the reluctance of doctors to attend training sessions.

The median score attributed to the importance of education was 7 (range 5-7). Scores given to the usefulness of the different WHO educational tools were as follows: training film, 7 (range 5-7); slide presentation, 6 (range 5-7); hand hygiene brochure, 7 (range 5-7); pocket leaflet, 7 (range 5-7); and the 9 recommendations leaflet, 7 (range 5-7).

Observation and feedback. All sites adopted the WHO

observation method and found it relatively easy to apply due to the precise instructions included in the Manual for Observers. The median score attributed to both the importance of observation and feedback and the usefulness of the Manual for Observers was 7 (ranges 4-7 and 1-7, respectively). Observers were mainly infection control nurses. Nevertheless, difficulties were experienced for their validation and the time availability for this task, particularly when limited manpower was available.

Feedback was noted as being very important to raise awareness and to acknowledge the results achieved. The method used most frequently was a slide presentation during educational sessions; in some cases, immediate compliance feedback and a written report were given to staff and the hospital directorate. In some facilities, the reaction of HCWs to reported low rates of compliance was not positive; in others, when data were disseminated to other units, they generated much interest to take part in the implementation.

The other WHO tools for evaluation (structure, perception and knowledge surveys) were used in some sites. Although their usefulness to gather a more comprehensive understanding of hand hygiene practices was acknowledged, it was also pointed out that it was too time-consuming to perform the surveys, some questionnaires are too long, and some questions are difficult to understand. In some sites, a combined knowledge/ perception questionnaire was developed locally.

Reminders in the workplace. WHO posters were used in

all sites and adapted locally in some cases. They were also useful for patients and visitors and led to spontaneous patient participation. Perishability was one concern and, in some sites, posters were plasticized to overcome this problem. The median score attributed to the importance of reminders was 6 (range 3-7;) median scores attributed to the WHO posters were as follows: “5 Moments”, 7 (range 6-7); “How to Handrub”, 6 (range 5-7); and “How to Handwash”, 6 (range 5-7).

Patient safety climate. Some coordinators pointed out that

the implementation of the hand hygiene campaign acted as a trigger to introduce other patient safety topics. Support from top managers and the directorate varied from strong practical support to more moral and verbal support among the different sites. No active patient participation was reported. The median score attributed to the importance of the promotion of a safety culture was 6 (range 2-7); scores attributed to the usefulness of the tools to secure managerial support were: information sheets, 5 (range 3-7); advocacy sheet, 4 (range 2-6); and senior managers’ letter template, 5 (range 2-7).

Table I.21.1

Basic requirements for implementation

Multimodal strategy Minimum criteria for implementation 1A. System change: alcohol-based

handrub

Bottles of alcohol-based handrub positioned at the point of care in each ward, or given to staff

1B. System change: access to safe continuous water supply and towels

One sink to at least every 10 beds

Soap and fresh towels available at every sink