Use of alcohol hand sanitizer as an infection control strategy in an acute care facility

Hilburn, Jessica; Hammond, Brian; Fendler, Eleanor J.; Groziak, Patricia A.

doi:10.1067/mic.2003.15

Cited by 138 publications

(97 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…One effective approach to preventing communicable diseases in congregate settings is the implementation of hand sanitation programs. Implementation of such programs has shown significant reductions in communicable diseases in many congregate settings, including schools (Dyer, Shinder, & Shinder, 2000;Hilburn, Hammond, Fendler, & Groziak, 2003), university campuses (White, Shinder, Shinder, & Dyer, 2001), healthcare facilities (Bischoff, Reynolds, Sessler, Edmond, & Wenzel, 2000;Doebbelin et al, 1992;Eaton, 2005;Hilburn, Hammond, Fendler, & Groziak, 2003;Larson et al, 2005;Park et al, 2010;White, Kolble, Carlson & Lipson, 2003), and military bases (Ryan & Christian 2001;Mott et al, 2007). Little research has been conducted to identify the cognitive stimulants and barriers of using hand sanitizers among military personnel in dining facilities.…”

Section: Statement Of the Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other studies have shown the benefits of effective hand sanitation including reducing the spread of diarrhea and gastrointestinal illnesses by almost 50% (Hilburn et al, 2003;Sandora et al, 2005). Commercial hand sanitizers, which generally contain 60% to 70% ethanol or isopropanol, are one of the most effective agents for reducing the number of viable pathogens on the hands even with artificial fingernails (Guilhermetti, Hernandes, Fukushigue, Garcia, & Cardoso, 2001;McNeil, Foster, Hedderwick, & Kauffman, 2001;Rotter, 1999).…”

Section: Hand Sanitizer History and Efficacymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To reduce infection or illness, proper hand hygiene practices must be accepted and used (Larson & Kretzer, 1995). Poor hand hygiene compliance is common among hand sanitation studies (Hilburn et al, 2003;Storr & Clayton, 2004). Reported reasons for not cleaning hands include skin irritation, inaccessible hand sanitation supplies, wearing gloves, being too busy, or not thinking about it.…”

Section: Fundamental Concepts Underlying Hand Sanitation Practicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Predicting and explaining behavioral intention and hand sanitizer use among US Army soldiers

Lin

Roberts

2017

American Journal of Infection Control

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many pathogenic microorganisms are spread by contaminated hands and may lead to foodborne illness. The use of hand sanitizers can significantly reduce bacterial contamination and is an efficient and inexpensive method to prevent infections and sickness. Previous researchers have found that the routine use of hand sanitizers allowed the U.S. Army to significantly reduce illness. However, few studies have been conducted within a U.S. Army dining facility, which is considered to be one of the primary sources of foodborne illness within the U.S. Army. Therefore, using the Theory of Planned Behavior, the purpose of this study was to identify the behavioral intention, attitudes, subjective norms, and perceptions of control of using hand sanitizer among military personnel.The study targeted soldiers using a written survey during their lunch hour on the U.S.Army base at Fort Riley, KS. A total of 201 surveys were collected. All data were screened and entered into IBM SPSS for analysis.Results indicated that attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control explained 64% of the variance in behavioral intention. Attitude and subjective norms were found to be significant predictors of behavioral intention, with attitude being the strongest predictor.In general, behavioral beliefs were positive among soldiers. Related to normative beliefs, soldiers did perceive negative social pressure from other soldiers not to use hand sanitizers.Analysis of control beliefs found soldiers perceived hand sanitizers were readily available, but disliked their smell and feel after application.Food production managers and Army commanders can use these results to implement hand sanitation behavioral interventions within military dining environments. Practical implications will likely translate to reduced healthcare costs, decreased absenteeism rates, and improved mission readiness.Some of the limitations include commonly perceived social psychology bias. Further, clustered samples were collected within one military installation in a relatively short amount of time.

show abstract

Section: Statement Of the Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Hand Sanitizer History and Efficacymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Fundamental Concepts Underlying Hand Sanitation Practicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Predicting and explaining behavioral intention and hand sanitizer use among US Army soldiers

Lin

Roberts

2017

American Journal of Infection Control

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…329,645,646 While the cost of hand hygiene products will continue to be an important issue for departments responsible for purchasing such products, the level of acceptance of products by HCWs is even more important. An inexpensive product with undesirable characteristics may discourage hand hygiene among HCWs and the resulting poor compliance will not be cost effective.…”

Section: Costmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…140,428,493,494,655,657,694,698,699,701,705,[707][708][709][710][715][716][717][718]728,853 In general, most studies differed greatly in their duration and intervention approach. Moreover, the outcome measure of hand hygiene compliance varied in terms of the definition of a hand hygiene opportunity and assessment of hand hygiene by means of direct observation 60,217,334,485,486,494,572,613,645,651,657,663,666,667,670,680,682,686,687,701,716 or consumption of hand hygiene products, 60,334,429,486,494,71 3,717,718,803,804,851 making comparison difficult, if not impossible. Despite different methodologies, most interventions have been associated with an increase in hand hygiene compliance, but a sustainable improvement demonstrated by a followup evaluation of two years or more after implementation has rarely been documented.…”

Section: Elements Of Promotion Strategiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hand Hygiene

Longtin¹,

Sax²,

Allegranzi³

et al. 2011

N Engl J Med

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Effect of Antiseptic Handwashing vs Alcohol Sanitizer on Health Care–Associated Infections in Neonatal Intensive Care Units

Larson¹,

Cimiotti²,

Haas³

et al. 2005

Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Infection rates and microbial counts on nurses' hands were equivalent during handwashing and alcohol phases, and nurses' skin condition was improved using alcohol. However, assessing the impact on infection rates of a single intervention is challenging because of multiple contributory factors such as patient risk, unit design, and staff behavior. Other practices such as frequency and quality of hand hygiene are likely to be as important as product in reducing risk of cross-transmission.

show abstract

Use of alcohol hand sanitizer as an infection control strategy in an acute care facility

Cited by 138 publications

References 26 publications

Predicting and explaining behavioral intention and hand sanitizer use among US Army soldiers

Predicting and explaining behavioral intention and hand sanitizer use among US Army soldiers

Hand Hygiene

Effect of Antiseptic Handwashing vs Alcohol Sanitizer on Health Care–Associated Infections in Neonatal Intensive Care Units

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About