Evaluating the effect of electronic monitoring and feedback on hand cream use in healthcare workers: Healthy Hands Project.
hand dermatitis
healthcare
irritant contact dermatitis
occupational
prevention
Journal
Contact dermatitis
ISSN: 1600-0536
Titre abrégé: Contact Dermatitis
Pays: England
ID NLM: 7604950
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jan 2019
Jan 2019
Historique:
received:
29
08
2018
revised:
25
09
2018
accepted:
26
09
2018
pubmed:
15
11
2018
medline:
7
5
2019
entrez:
15
11
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at high risk of developing hand dermatitis (HD). Current guidelines on HD prevention recommend the use of emollients; however, in practice, adherence is poor. To assess whether the provision of creams, electronic monitoring and feedback on cream consumption can improve skin care in HCWs. A cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted on 19 academic hospital wards, including 501 HCWs, for 12 months. The intervention wards (n = 9; 285 HCWs) were provided with hand cream dispensers equipped with an electronic system to monitor use, which was regularly communicated to the HCWs by the use of posters. The process outcomes were self-reported cream consumption in both groups, and electronically measured consumption per ward in the intervention group (IG) vs the control group (CG). Self-reported cream use at follow-up was significantly higher in the IG than in the CG, before (odds ratio [OR] 2.27; 95%CI: 1.29-3.97; P = 0.004) and during (OR 3.30; 95%CI: 1.80-6.06, P < 0.001) the shift, whereas at baseline there was no difference between the groups. In the IG, electronically measured cream use was, on average, 0.4 events per shift per HCW. The intervention improved hand cream use, and may therefore be considered as a practical strategy to promote skin care in HCWs. Notwithstanding this, the application frequency remained lower than recommended in the present study and current guidelines.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Healthcare workers (HCWs) are at high risk of developing hand dermatitis (HD). Current guidelines on HD prevention recommend the use of emollients; however, in practice, adherence is poor.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
To assess whether the provision of creams, electronic monitoring and feedback on cream consumption can improve skin care in HCWs.
METHODS
METHODS
A cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted on 19 academic hospital wards, including 501 HCWs, for 12 months. The intervention wards (n = 9; 285 HCWs) were provided with hand cream dispensers equipped with an electronic system to monitor use, which was regularly communicated to the HCWs by the use of posters. The process outcomes were self-reported cream consumption in both groups, and electronically measured consumption per ward in the intervention group (IG) vs the control group (CG).
RESULTS
RESULTS
Self-reported cream use at follow-up was significantly higher in the IG than in the CG, before (odds ratio [OR] 2.27; 95%CI: 1.29-3.97; P = 0.004) and during (OR 3.30; 95%CI: 1.80-6.06, P < 0.001) the shift, whereas at baseline there was no difference between the groups. In the IG, electronically measured cream use was, on average, 0.4 events per shift per HCW.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The intervention improved hand cream use, and may therefore be considered as a practical strategy to promote skin care in HCWs. Notwithstanding this, the application frequency remained lower than recommended in the present study and current guidelines.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30426525
doi: 10.1111/cod.13148
pmc: PMC6587989
doi:
Substances chimiques
Emollients
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
26-34Subventions
Organisme : DEB Group Ltd, Denby, UK
Informations de copyright
© 2018 The Authors. Contact Dermatitis published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
J Dermatol Sci. 1999 Jan;19(1):48-52
pubmed: 9890375
Trials. 2017 Feb 28;18(1):92
pubmed: 28245835
Health Promot Int. 2014 Dec;29(4):751-8
pubmed: 23648336
PLoS One. 2012;7(10):e41617
pubmed: 23110040
Contact Dermatitis. 2019 Jan;80(1):26-34
pubmed: 30426525
Am J Infect Control. 2016 Aug 1;44(8):956-7
pubmed: 27346800
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1990 Apr;11(4):191-3
pubmed: 2332602
Contact Dermatitis. 2015 May;72(5):325-36
pubmed: 25739424
J Dtsch Dermatol Ges. 2015 Jan;13(1):77-85
pubmed: 25640512
Contact Dermatitis. 2005 Dec;53(6):344-9
pubmed: 16364124
GMS Krankenhhyg Interdiszip. 2011;6(1):Doc08
pubmed: 22242089
J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2017 Jan;31(1):53-64
pubmed: 27545662
Am J Infect Control. 1998 Oct;26(5):513-21
pubmed: 9795681
Contact Dermatitis. 2014 Jan;70(1):44-55
pubmed: 24102246
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Jun 10;100(12):7360-5
pubmed: 12771381
Occup Med (Lond). 2018 Jun 20;68(5):340-342
pubmed: 29741666
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Apr 30;4:CD004414
pubmed: 29708265
Contact Dermatitis. 2018 Nov;79(5):314-316
pubmed: 30019455
Lancet. 2000 Aug 26;356(9231):768-9
pubmed: 11085715
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Jun 13;(6):CD000259
pubmed: 22696318
J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2017 Jun;31 Suppl 4:3-4
pubmed: 28656730