ArticleJournal of infection prevention2016
Potential infection control risks associated with roaming healthcare industry representatives.
Article in Journal of infection prevention, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ethical and regulatory implications of the COVID-19 pandemic for the medical devices industry and its representatives.BMC medical ethics · 2022Review
- Strategies to Prevent Healthcare-Associated Infections: A Narrative Overview.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHealthcare industry representatives (HCIR) visit multiple hospitals every day. Most enter hygiene sensitive areas and work in close proximity to caregivers and patients.
objectiveThe objective of the present study was to evaluate the HCIRs' current status in hygiene training and vaccination.
methodsAn anonymous walking intercept study was used based on questionnaires to evaluate industry representatives in comparison to physicians and nurses (n = 311 participants, participation rate 30.2%) after their visit to the MEDICA Congress. The valid participants consisted of HCIR (n = 208), hospital nurses (n = 49) and physicians (n = 41). A total of 82.2% (n = 171) HCIR worked in varying hospitals.
resultsThey frequently request access to hygiene and data-privacy sensitive areas: Among them 51.9% (n = 108) accessed the outpatient clinic, 41.8% (n = 87) the operating room (OR), 33.7% (n = 70) the central supply and sterilisation department (CSSD), and 32.7% (n = 68) the intensive care unit. HCIR requesting access to hygiene sensitive areas showed the lowest scores in hygiene training and a significantly lower Hepatitis B vaccination status, i.e. 37.5% compared to 70.7% for physicians and 53.1% for nurses. DISCUSSION: Status of HCIR hygiene training was inadequate - as was vaccination and contamination control. Therefore, HCIR are exposed to increased infection risk and may unknowingly act as infection vector between different hospitals.
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.