ArticleJournal of infection prevention2015
A discourse analysis of hand hygiene policy in NHS Trusts.
Article in Journal of infection prevention, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionHealthcare-associated infection is a major patient safety concern. Hand hygiene is widely thought to be the single most important measure to affect reductions but compliance is problematic. Producing policies that clearly outline the responsibilities of staff is seen as a key way to instil accountability and improve performance.
objectivesThe purpose of this study is to examine the discourse of hand hygiene policies across 359 NHS Trusts in England and consider the implications for practice.
methodThe data were examined by combining the techniques of corpus linguistics with critical discourse analysis to generate keywords and concordance lines and then to make an interpretation what this may mean for the healthcare worker.
resultsHigh frequency words such as 'must', 'should', 'will', 'responsible', 'compliance' and 'audit' suggest a tone that is authoritative and unyielding. This creates a fractured relationship between those who produce policies and the healthcare workers who need to comply with them.
conclusionIn their intentions to advance patient care policy, producers take little account of the messy, contextual factors that make the recommendations challenging to implement in daily practice. Firstly, Trusts should consider the use language that acknowledges the dynamic nature of practice and, secondly, cease using audit data as an indicator of performance as the conditions under which information is collected lacks reliability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.