PICOT Questions
Question 1: Does hand washing among health workers compared to no handwashing reduce Hospital-acquired infections?
Healthcare providers handle patients with different kinds of infections every single day. Hygiene is an essential part of a health worker because they can quickly spread disease from one person to the other or risk getting infected also. Handwashing can reduce the risk of spreading infection significantly. Healthcare workers’ hands represent the primary pathway for the transmission of nosocomial pathogens. It is good to ensure hands are washed before and after tending to a patient, especially before and after surgical operations. Studies show the contrary, health workers only wash their hands half the number of times they are required to do. It contributes to the spread of healthcare-associated problems that affect 1 in 25 hospitals. A patient is more likely to get an infection when they are being treated for something else. Therefore, the failure of doctors and health workers to wash their ha
Question 2: Is the use of soap and water or alcohol-based rubs more effective in preventing hospital infections? The hygiene of hands is essential for doctors and healthcare workers. Soap and water are only used to clean the sides when they are visibly soiled. Evidence has shown that the use of water ad soap to remove antibiotic-resistant organisms (AROs) is less effective compared to the use of alcohol-based rubs. Soap and water cannot be used in all situations and high-risk areas such as Intensive care units, Transplant units, Burn units, Haematology/oncology units, and Haemodialysis units. The alcohol-based disinfectants are more effective in removing the antibiotic-resistant organisms that may be present on the hands and any other part of the body that comes into contact when treating a patient. hospital-acquired infections were reduced by 25% by using alcohol-based rubs compared to a control group who washed with soap alone
Questions 3: Does the use of waterless, alcohol-based hand sanitizer in addition to handwashing with antiseptic soap and water by patients in the neonatal intensive care unit reduce the number of Hospital-acquired infections? Hand rubbing with a waterless, alcohol-based rub-in cleanser is commonly is used in many European countries instead of hand washing. Scientific evidence and ease of use support that It is microbiologically more effective in vitro and in vivo. It is gentler on the skin and effective, and therefore its use reduced the number of hospital-acquired infections.
Qualitative Rapid Critical Appraisal Checklist and Summary
Article One
Shinde, M. B., & Mohite, V. R. (2014). A study to assess knowledge, attitude, and practices of five moments of hand hygiene among the nursing staff and students at a tertiary care hospital at Karad. International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR), 3(2), 311-321. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/f792/a543823f3e3c2846994c56069b80bcfa84cd.pdf
Why was the study done?
The study was doe to assess knowledge, attitude, and practices among healthcare workers and was also to establish the five moments that call for the use of had hygiene.
What is the problem as it is presented in the research study article?
The prevailing numbers of infections associated with not observing hygiene by doctors and healthcare workers and the attitude of health workers and doctors towards washing of hands.
Will the study solve a problem relevant to nursing?
It will reduce the rate of cross-infection associated with hygienics of medical personnel attending to patients in hospitals.
What is the study setting? (Include who, where, and when.)
The study was conducted in a tertiary medical college, involved 100 nursing staff and 100 nursing students, and was conducted in the year 2014.
What is the sample size? (Size can and should vary according to the nature of the study.)
A maximum of 200 people was involved in the study, and it included 100 nursing staff and 100 nursing students in the institution.
What was the process for randomization?
The simple randomization method was used in the research.
Are instruments of the variables in the study clearly defined and reliable?
The instruments of variables in the study are defined and reliable as seen by the use of the WHO hand hygiene questionnaire
What are the independent and dependent variables in this study?
The attitude of health-workers, knowledge, and practice.
Are the operational definitions of the variables given? If so, are they concrete and measurable?
The operational definitions of the variables have been given, and they are concrete ad measurable.
Is the research question or the hypothesis stated? What is it? (Make sure the variables were consistently applied throughout the study and that they measured what the research said they were going to measure.) (Report reliability and validity statistics if noted.)
Assessing Knowledge, Attitude, and Practices of Five Moments of Hand Hygiene among Nursing Staff.
How were the data analyzed?
The data was analyzed through critical analysis and presentation of a bar diagram to show the variables.
Were there any unusual events during the study? (If the sample size changed, do the reasons for the change have ramifications on its replicability?)
There were no significant events during the study
Did participants drop from the research? Why?
There were no participants that dropped from the research
How do the results fit in with previous research in this area? (Compare to your other sources.) Do the studies build upon previous research?
The study builds upon previous research in the area, and it fits previous research in this area.
What are the implications of the research for clinical practice?
The study highlights the urgent need for introducing measures to increase the knowledge, attitudes, and practices, which may play a significant role in improving hand hygiene compliance.
Is the study relevant and essential to the clinical question?
The study is critical because hand hygiene for medical staff is vital in reducing the number of hospital infections.
Are the results applicable to your set or subset of patients or samples, identify the risks and benefits of a treatment recommendation, or conform to patient preferences?
The results are applicable and to patient preferences
What are the findings as reported by the researcher?
The knowledge on hand hygiene was moderate (144 out of 200, 74%) among the total study population
Summary
There was a deviation in the number of people to be studied with numbers varying from a minimum of 50 to a maximum of 150. The methods of researching the articles were varied, and the analysis of the results was different with some research articles presenting a visual picture of the findings through representation in bar graphs and pie charts. Not all the research was done in actual hospitals with real patients to work with and monitor. The time taken to research most of the articles was varied, and so was the budgetary allocation for the study.
Most research articles dealt with the issue of hygiene in the hospitals and the significance of finding means with which to improve the health of hospital staff handling patients after and before some given procedure. All the research articles colluded through findings the importance of making sure medical staff, especially nurses, are aware and acknowledge the importance of hygiene in the hospital. The research target group for most of the articles consisted of medical personnel or stakeholders I the health sector. Senior persons in the health sector conducted the research articles.
Article two
Kamble, V. S., Biradar, S. M., Takpere, A., & Reddy, S. (2017). Knowledge of hand hygiene practices among students of ESIC medical college, Gulbarga, Karnataka, India. International Journal of Community Medicine and Public Health, 3(1), 94-98.
http://www.iosrjournals.org/iosr-jdms/papers/Vol14-issue5/Version-2/K014523944.pdf
Why was the study done?
The study was planned to find out the practice of personal hygiene & frequency of morbidities among medical students under investigation.
What is the problem as it is presented in the research study article?
the practice of personal hygiene & frequency of morbidities
Will the study solve a problem relevant to nursing?
The research will solve a significant issue in nursing because Personal hygiene is now regarded as one of the most critical elements of infection control activities. It alone can significantly reduce the risk of cross-transmission of infection in a health care setting
What is the study setting? (Include who, where, and when.)
The study was done in a rural medical college in West Bengal India, and it involved the medical students in the institution and was conducted in February 2015.
What is the sample size? (Size can and should vary according to the nature of the study.)
201 participants did the research.
What was the process for randomization?
Block randomization was used in the research.
Are instruments of the variables in the study clearly defined and reliable?
The instruments of study are clearly defined and reliable based on the results of the research.
What are the independent and dependent variables in this study?
The number of participants conscious about personal hygiene and those who are not.
Are the operational definitions of the variables given? If so, are they concrete and measurable?
There are both dependent and independent variables in the study, and they are concrete and measurable.
Is the research question or the hypothesis stated? What is it? (Make sure the variables were consistently applied throughout the study and that they measured what the research said they were going to measure.) (Report reliability and validity statistics if noted.)
The practice of Personal Hygiene & Morbidity Pattern among Medical Students. The statistics of the data were reliable and valid throughout the study.
How were the data analyzed?
The data was analyzed through cross-sectional analysis by looking at all variables presented in the study.
Were there any unusual events during the study? (If the sample size changed, do the reasons for the change have ramifications on its replicability?)
There were o unexpected changes during the research.
Did participants drop from the research? Why?
Participants were all present during the time of the research.
How do the results fit in with previous research in this area? (Compare to your other sources.) Do the studies build upon previous research?
The above studies are correlated with the present study. Usman S and Bhat S, in their research, showed oral health and knowledge and attitude were high among dental students as it is a significant part of their professional education. Still, medical students showed poor oral health knowledge comparatively. In the present study, 98.90% and 32.97% of students of 6th-semester brush teeth in the morning and both in the morning & after dinner, respectively. The similar figures for 8th-semester students were 96.36% and 10.90%, respectively.
What are the implications of the research for clinical practice?
Personal hygiene for medical personnel is essential in preventing cross-infections in clinical settings.
Is the study relevant and essential to the clinical question?
The study is critical because it shows the negligence medical personnel sometimes have in observing personal hygiene, such as not washing hands.
Are the results applicable to your set or subset of patients or samples, identify the risks and benefits of a treatment recommendation, or conform to patient preferences?
The research applies to my set of patients.
What are the findings as reported by the researcher?
The average awareness regarding the positive indications of hand hygiene was 56%. Rests of the 44% of students were either not sure or unaware of the signs of health. Only 29% of students were able to identify all the five indications for hand hygiene. There was no significant difference between the two genders
Summary
The research participants in the studies in the articles were majorly students who are in medical colleges and had not graduated. The number of participants in the survey was constant, with the minimum amount being 200. The randomization method for the sampling of the participants in the research articles was the same for all the materials. There was consistency in the results of the research conducted in each of the pieces. The scope of the study was the same, and the conclusion for each analysis was similar, highlighting the importance hygiene plays in the medical sector. The participants of the research were of both gender and a given age in all the research articles.
The difference in the research articles was seen in the methods that were used to analyze the results were different and varying according to the amount of data they had. The geographical location of the research was also changed; each research was conducted in different areas. There were also different variables under study. The studies did not have a defined number of both genders who could participate in the study.
References
Shinde, M. B., & Mohite, V. R. (2014). A study to assess knowledge, attitude and practices of five moments of hand hygiene among nursing staff and students at a tertiary care hospital at Karad. International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR), 3(2), 311-321.
Kamble, V. S., Biradar, S. M., Takpere, A., & Reddy, S. (2017). Knowledge of hand hygiene practices among students of ESIC medical college, Gulbarga, Karnataka, India. International Journal of Community Medicine and Public Health, 3(1), 94-98.