ArticleVeterinary sciences2021
Hand Hygiene Evaluation Using Two Different Evaluation Tools and Hand Contamination of Veterinary Healthcare Workers in a Swiss Companion Animal Clinic.
Article in Veterinary sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Molecular epidemiology and environmental persistence of methicillin-resistant coagulase-positiveVeterinary world · 2025Article
- Animal Health Protection - Assessing Antimicrobial Activity of Veterinary Disinfectants and Antiseptics and Their Compliance with European Standards: A Narrative Review.Polish journal of microbiology · 2024Review
- Occurrence and characterization of ESKAPE organisms on the hands of veterinary students before patient contact at a veterinary academic hospital, South Africa.BMC veterinary research · 2024Article
- Nursing strategies for the mechanically ventilated patient.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2023Review
- Massive Spread of OXA-48 Carbapenemase-Producing Enterobacteriaceae in the Environment of a Swiss Companion Animal Clinic.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
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
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 (
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.