Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40069828›Full record

ArticleAntimicrobial resistance and infection control2025

Bodily waste management and related hygiene practices in nursing homes of Vaud: findings from a multicentre cross-sectional survey as a basis for targeted interventions.

Emmanouil Glampedakis, Marie-Catherine Snoussi, Béatrix Sobgoui, Firmino Battistella, Patricia Cuiña Iglesias, Coralie Riccio, Laetitia Qalla-Widmer, Alessandro Cassini, Marie Immaculée Nahimana Tessemo

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Antimicrobial resistance and infection control, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Dirty Utility Rooms of Hospitals in Saudi Arabia: A Multi-Regional Case Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025
    Observational
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

9 authors.

Emmanouil GlampedakisCantonal Unit for Infection Prevention and Control, Public Health Service, Lausanne, Switzerland. emmanouil.glampedakis@vd.ch.
Marie-Catherine SnoussiCantonal Unit for Infection Prevention and Control, Public Health Service, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Béatrix SobgouiCantonal Unit for Infection Prevention and Control, Public Health Service, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Firmino BattistellaCantonal Unit for Infection Prevention and Control, Public Health Service, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Patricia Cuiña IglesiasCantonal Unit for Infection Prevention and Control, Public Health Service, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Coralie RiccioCantonal Unit for Infection Prevention and Control, Public Health Service, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Laetitia Qalla-WidmerLa Source School of Nursing, HES-SO University of Applied Sciences and Arts Western Switzerland, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Alessandro CassiniPublic Health Department, Canton of Vaud, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Marie Immaculée Nahimana TessemoCantonal Unit for Infection Prevention and Control, Public Health Service, Lausanne, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionBodily waste management is a critical yet frequently neglected domain of infection prevention and control. We conducted a survey to examine various aspects of bodily waste management and related hygiene practices in nursing homes (NH) based on existing recommendations.

methodsAll NHs (n = 120) of canton Vaud in Switzerland were invited to participate in this cross-sectional survey between July 2022 and February 2023 using a questionnaire.

resultsEighty-seven NHs participated in the survey (72.5%). Of these, 33% had internal protocols on bodily waste management, 98% had at least a dirty utility room (median: 4 per NH) and all a bedpan washer-disinfector (WD), yet only 66% met the cantonal recommendation of bedpan WD density (1/15 beds). Separation of soiled and clean compartments was present in 51%, complete hand hygiene supplies in 73% and personal protective equipment (PPE) in 30% of utility rooms. Fifty-four percent of NHs reported having a lid for each bedpan. Systematic use of lids was reported in 33% of institutions and of gloves in 98%, for the transport of used bodily waste collection tools. All surveyed institutions reported performing automated reprocessing of bodily waste collection tools in bedpan WDs and use of manual pre-cleaning was anecdotal. Regular maintenance and validation of bedpan WDs was present in almost all participating NHs.

conclusionIdentified actionable priorities include making bodily waste management protocols accessible to staff, delineation of clean and soiled compartments in utility rooms and equipping them with PPE and hand hygiene supplies, as well as educating healthcare workers on best practices for the transport and disposal of bodily waste.

Indexed as

HygieneInfection ControlMedical Waste DisposalNursing HomesWaste ManagementCross-Sectional StudiesHumansPersonal Protective EquipmentSurveys and QuestionnairesSwitzerlandMedical Waste DisposalBedpansBodily wasteExcretaHuman wasteHygieneInfection prevention and controlIPCNursingPreventionStandard precautionsUrinals

Identifiers

PMID40069828
PMCPMC11895322

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.