The Clean pilot study: evaluation of an environmental hygiene intervention bundle in three Tanzanian hospitals.
Cleaning
Environmental hygiene
Intervention
Maternity
Pilot
Training
Journal
Antimicrobial resistance and infection control
ISSN: 2047-2994
Titre abrégé: Antimicrob Resist Infect Control
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101585411
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 01 2021
07 01 2021
Historique:
received:
29
04
2020
accepted:
25
11
2020
entrez:
8
1
2021
pubmed:
9
1
2021
medline:
5
11
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Healthcare associated infections (HAI) are estimated to affect up to 15% of hospital inpatients in low-income countries (LICs). A critical but often neglected aspect of HAI prevention is basic environmental hygiene, particularly surface cleaning and linen management. TEACH CLEAN is an educational intervention aimed at improving environmental hygiene. We evaluated the effectiveness of this intervention in a pilot study in three high-volume maternity and newborn units in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. This study design prospectively evaluated the intervention as a whole, and offered a before-and-after comparison of the impact of the main training. We measured changes in microbiological cleanliness [Aerobic Colony Counts (ACC) and presence of Staphylococcus aureus] using dipslides, and physical cleaning action using gel dots. These were analysed with descriptive statistics and logistic regression models. We used qualitative (focus group discussions, in-depth interviews, and semi-structured observation) and quantitative (observation checklist) tools to measure why and how the intervention worked. We describe these findings across the themes of adaptation, fidelity, dose, reach and context. Microbiological cleanliness improved during the study period (ACC pre-training: 19%; post-training: 41%). The odds of cleanliness increased on average by 1.33 weekly during the pre-training period (CI = 1.11-1.60), and by 1.08 (CI = 1.03-1.13) during the post-training period. Cleaning action improved only in the pre-training period. Detection of S. aureus on hospital surfaces did not change substantially. The intervention was well received and considered feasible in this context. The major pitfalls in the implementation were the limited number of training sessions at the hospital level and the lack of supportive supervision. A systems barrier to implementation was lack of regular cleaning supplies. The evaluation suggests that improvements in microbiological cleanliness are possible using this intervention and can be sustained. Improved microbiological cleanliness is a key step on the pathway to infection prevention in hospitals. Future research should assess whether this bundle is cost-effective in reducing bacterial and viral transmission and infection using a rigorous study design.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Healthcare associated infections (HAI) are estimated to affect up to 15% of hospital inpatients in low-income countries (LICs). A critical but often neglected aspect of HAI prevention is basic environmental hygiene, particularly surface cleaning and linen management. TEACH CLEAN is an educational intervention aimed at improving environmental hygiene. We evaluated the effectiveness of this intervention in a pilot study in three high-volume maternity and newborn units in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
METHODS
This study design prospectively evaluated the intervention as a whole, and offered a before-and-after comparison of the impact of the main training. We measured changes in microbiological cleanliness [Aerobic Colony Counts (ACC) and presence of Staphylococcus aureus] using dipslides, and physical cleaning action using gel dots. These were analysed with descriptive statistics and logistic regression models. We used qualitative (focus group discussions, in-depth interviews, and semi-structured observation) and quantitative (observation checklist) tools to measure why and how the intervention worked. We describe these findings across the themes of adaptation, fidelity, dose, reach and context.
RESULTS
Microbiological cleanliness improved during the study period (ACC pre-training: 19%; post-training: 41%). The odds of cleanliness increased on average by 1.33 weekly during the pre-training period (CI = 1.11-1.60), and by 1.08 (CI = 1.03-1.13) during the post-training period. Cleaning action improved only in the pre-training period. Detection of S. aureus on hospital surfaces did not change substantially. The intervention was well received and considered feasible in this context. The major pitfalls in the implementation were the limited number of training sessions at the hospital level and the lack of supportive supervision. A systems barrier to implementation was lack of regular cleaning supplies.
CONCLUSIONS
The evaluation suggests that improvements in microbiological cleanliness are possible using this intervention and can be sustained. Improved microbiological cleanliness is a key step on the pathway to infection prevention in hospitals. Future research should assess whether this bundle is cost-effective in reducing bacterial and viral transmission and infection using a rigorous study design.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33413647
doi: 10.1186/s13756-020-00866-8
pii: 10.1186/s13756-020-00866-8
pmc: PMC7789081
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
8Subventions
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MR/R019274/1
Pays : United Kingdom
Références
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2008 Nov;29(11):1035-41
pubmed: 18851687
PLoS One. 2011 Feb 28;6(2):e17155
pubmed: 21386886
Int J Hyg Environ Health. 2018 Apr;221(3):409-422
pubmed: 29352706
J Hosp Infect. 2019 May;102(1):98-100
pubmed: 30195721
Int J Womens Health. 2019 May 09;11:309-318
pubmed: 31191039
Glob Health Action. 2016 Sep 16;9:33381
pubmed: 27640424
Lancet. 2020 Mar 28;395(10229):1015-1018
pubmed: 32197103
Ann Fam Med. 2004 May-Jun;2(3):204-8
pubmed: 15209195
Glob Health Action. 2019;12(1):1480085
pubmed: 31154993
Health Policy Plan. 2017 Oct 1;32(8):1220-1228
pubmed: 28931118
Lancet. 2011 Jan 15;377(9761):228-41
pubmed: 21146207
Am J Infect Control. 2016 Dec 1;44(12):1558-1564
pubmed: 27561433
Lancet. 2005 Mar 26-Apr 1;365(9465):1175-88
pubmed: 15794973
Lancet Glob Health. 2018 Nov;6(11):e1155-e1157
pubmed: 30196094
Int Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2020 Jan 27;46:1-12
pubmed: 31990643
Lancet Infect Dis. 2019 Apr;19(4):410-418
pubmed: 30858014
J Hosp Infect. 2017 Jan;95(1):76-80
pubmed: 27912981
BMJ. 2015 Mar 19;350:h1258
pubmed: 25791983
Lancet Infect Dis. 2019 Nov;19(11):1219-1234
pubmed: 31522858
Implement Sci. 2016 Mar 24;11:44
pubmed: 27009342
J Hosp Infect. 2012 Mar;80(3):206-11
pubmed: 22297169
J Hosp Infect. 2004 Jan;56(1):10-5
pubmed: 14706265
Bull World Health Organ. 2011 Oct 1;89(10):757-65
pubmed: 22084514
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2011 Dec;32(12):1187-93
pubmed: 22080657
PLoS One. 2019 Oct 9;14(10):e0222922
pubmed: 31596861
J Hosp Infect. 2019 Dec;103(4):363-374
pubmed: 31369807
Lancet. 2016 Oct 29;388(10056):2193-2208
pubmed: 27642023