Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37611926›Full record

ArticleEvaluation review2024

Process Evaluation of an Acute-Care Nurse-Centred Hand Hygiene Intervention in US Hospitals.

Madeline Sands, Robert Aunger

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Evaluation review, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Madeline SandsHealth Care Provider, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Robert AungerDepartment of Infectious Disease, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8136-9376

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper describes a process evaluation of a 'wise' intervention that took place in six acute care units in two medical-surgical teaching hospitals in the United States during 2016-2017. 'Wise' interventions are short, inexpensive interventions that depend on triggering specific psychological mechanisms to achieve behaviour change. This study sought to increase the hand hygiene compliance (HHC) rates before entering a patient's room among nurses. The intervention centred on the use of threat to professional identity to prompt improved HHC. Through questionnaires administered to intervention participants and the implementation facilitator, together with independent observation of intervention delivery, we examined whether the steps in the Theory of Change occurred as expected. We found that aspects of the implementation-including mode of delivery, use of incentives, and how nurses were recruited and complied with the intervention-affected reach and likely effectiveness. While components of the intervention's mechanisms of impact-such as the element of surprise-were successful, they ultimately did not translate into performance of the target behaviour. Performance was also not affected by use of an implementation intention as repeated performance of HHC over years of being a nurse has likely already established well-ingrained practices. Context did have an effect; the safety culture of the units, the involvement of the Nurse Managers, the level of accountability for HHC in each unit, and the hospitals themselves all influenced levels of engagement. These conclusions should have implications for those interested in the applicability of 'wise' interventions and those seeking to improve HHC in hospitals.

Indexed as

Guideline AdherenceHand HygieneNursing Staff, HospitalCross InfectionHospitals, TeachingHumansSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited Statesbehaviour centred designhand hygienehealthcare workershospitalsprocess evaluationwise intervention

Identifiers

PMID37611926
PMCPMC11193912

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.