Hand Hygiene Evaluation Using Two Different Evaluation Tools and Hand Contamination of Veterinary Healthcare Workers in a Swiss Companion Animal Clinic

Hand hygiene (HH) is the most important measure to prevent nosocomial infections. HH compliance in companion animal clinics has been reported to be poor. The present study compared an online application with the WHO evaluation form to assess the WHO five moments of HH in a Swiss companion animal cli...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Kira Schmitt, Anna Barbara Emilia Zimmermann, Roger Stephan, Barbara Willi
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	MDPI AG 2021
Materias:	hand hygiene infection prevention control hospital antibiotic resistance Veterinary medicine SF600-1100
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/85d46c3f16434a00a19d7acad7baf0a7
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:85d46c3f16434a00a19d7acad7baf0a7
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:85d46c3f16434a00a19d7acad7baf0a72021-11-25T19:11:57ZHand Hygiene Evaluation Using Two Different Evaluation Tools and Hand Contamination of Veterinary Healthcare Workers in a Swiss Companion Animal Clinic10.3390/vetsci81102602306-7381https://doaj.org/article/85d46c3f16434a00a19d7acad7baf0a72021-11-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.mdpi.com/2306-7381/8/11/260https://doaj.org/toc/2306-7381Hand hygiene (HH) is the most important measure to prevent nosocomial infections. HH compliance in companion animal clinics has been reported to be poor. The present study compared an online application with the WHO evaluation form to assess the WHO five moments of HH in a Swiss companion animal clinic. In 202 hand swabs from 87 staff members, total viable count (TVC) before and after patient contact was evaluated and the swabs were tested for selected antimicrobial resistant microorganisms of public health importance. HH compliance (95% confidence interval) was 36.6% (33.8–39.5%) and was similar when assessed with the two evaluation tools. HH differed between hospital areas (<i>p</i> = 0.0035) and HH indications (<i>p</i> < 0.0001). Gloves were worn in 22.0% (18.0–26.6%) of HH observations and were indicated in 37.2% (27.3–48.3%) of these observations. Mean TVC before patient contact was lower (0.52 log CFU/cm<sup>2</sup>) than after patient contact (1.02 log CFU/cm<sup>2</sup>) but was similar before patient contact on gloved and ungloved hands. Three hand swabs (1.5% (0.4–4.3%)) were positive for methicillin-resistant <i>Staphylococcus aureus.</i> Gloving should not be regarded as a substitute for HH. Overall, HH in companion animal medicine should urgently be fostered.Kira SchmittAnna Barbara Emilia ZimmermannRoger StephanBarbara WilliMDPI AGarticlehandhygieneinfection prevention controlhospitalantibiotic resistanceVeterinary medicineSF600-1100ENVeterinary Sciences, Vol 8, Iss 260, p 260 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	hand hygiene infection prevention control hospital antibiotic resistance Veterinary medicine SF600-1100
spellingShingle	hand hygiene infection prevention control hospital antibiotic resistance Veterinary medicine SF600-1100 Kira Schmitt Anna Barbara Emilia Zimmermann Roger Stephan Barbara Willi Hand Hygiene Evaluation Using Two Different Evaluation Tools and Hand Contamination of Veterinary Healthcare Workers in a Swiss Companion Animal Clinic
description	Hand hygiene (HH) is the most important measure to prevent nosocomial infections. HH compliance in companion animal clinics has been reported to be poor. The present study compared an online application with the WHO evaluation form to assess the WHO five moments of HH in a Swiss companion animal clinic. In 202 hand swabs from 87 staff members, total viable count (TVC) before and after patient contact was evaluated and the swabs were tested for selected antimicrobial resistant microorganisms of public health importance. HH compliance (95% confidence interval) was 36.6% (33.8–39.5%) and was similar when assessed with the two evaluation tools. HH differed between hospital areas (<i>p</i> = 0.0035) and HH indications (<i>p</i> < 0.0001). Gloves were worn in 22.0% (18.0–26.6%) of HH observations and were indicated in 37.2% (27.3–48.3%) of these observations. Mean TVC before patient contact was lower (0.52 log CFU/cm<sup>2</sup>) than after patient contact (1.02 log CFU/cm<sup>2</sup>) but was similar before patient contact on gloved and ungloved hands. Three hand swabs (1.5% (0.4–4.3%)) were positive for methicillin-resistant <i>Staphylococcus aureus.</i> Gloving should not be regarded as a substitute for HH. Overall, HH in companion animal medicine should urgently be fostered.
format	article
author	Kira Schmitt Anna Barbara Emilia Zimmermann Roger Stephan Barbara Willi
author_facet	Kira Schmitt Anna Barbara Emilia Zimmermann Roger Stephan Barbara Willi
author_sort	Kira Schmitt
title	Hand Hygiene Evaluation Using Two Different Evaluation Tools and Hand Contamination of Veterinary Healthcare Workers in a Swiss Companion Animal Clinic
title_short	Hand Hygiene Evaluation Using Two Different Evaluation Tools and Hand Contamination of Veterinary Healthcare Workers in a Swiss Companion Animal Clinic
title_full	Hand Hygiene Evaluation Using Two Different Evaluation Tools and Hand Contamination of Veterinary Healthcare Workers in a Swiss Companion Animal Clinic
title_fullStr	Hand Hygiene Evaluation Using Two Different Evaluation Tools and Hand Contamination of Veterinary Healthcare Workers in a Swiss Companion Animal Clinic
title_full_unstemmed	Hand Hygiene Evaluation Using Two Different Evaluation Tools and Hand Contamination of Veterinary Healthcare Workers in a Swiss Companion Animal Clinic
title_sort	hand hygiene evaluation using two different evaluation tools and hand contamination of veterinary healthcare workers in a swiss companion animal clinic
publisher	MDPI AG
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/85d46c3f16434a00a19d7acad7baf0a7
work_keys_str_mv	AT kiraschmitt handhygieneevaluationusingtwodifferentevaluationtoolsandhandcontaminationofveterinaryhealthcareworkersinaswisscompanionanimalclinic AT annabarbaraemiliazimmermann handhygieneevaluationusingtwodifferentevaluationtoolsandhandcontaminationofveterinaryhealthcareworkersinaswisscompanionanimalclinic AT rogerstephan handhygieneevaluationusingtwodifferentevaluationtoolsandhandcontaminationofveterinaryhealthcareworkersinaswisscompanionanimalclinic AT barbarawilli handhygieneevaluationusingtwodifferentevaluationtoolsandhandcontaminationofveterinaryhealthcareworkersinaswisscompanionanimalclinic
_version_	1718410168321966080

Hand Hygiene Evaluation Using Two Different Evaluation Tools and Hand Contamination of Veterinary Healthcare Workers in a Swiss Companion Animal Clinic

Ejemplares similares