Hand Hygiene Infection Control Research Paper

Methods and Specific Plans to Maintain a Successful Project Solution

To maintain a successful project solution of hand hygiene, the application of change models and monitoring programs is necessary. Change models offer appropriate methods that nurses can apply in undertaking evidence-based practice of hand hygiene. Brown argues that the Iowa model is effective in the maintenance of hand hygiene because it builds an organizational culture that promotes standard hand hygiene practices (158). The application of the Iowa model has a transformative effect because it introduces favorable organizational culture that promotes hand hygiene practices based on robust evidence. Rosswurm and Larrabee assert that the change model is necessary for the maintenance of change because it enhances the diffusion of evidence-based practices that healthcare providers need to adopt (317). In this view, the change model provides a systematic process that healthcare providers follow in adopting and maintaining change. The monitoring program is another method that is integral to the maintenance of hand hygiene. Plans in the monitoring include the issuance of unique cards or certification of nurses, who attend training, real-time observance of healthcare providers using CCTV cameras. Moreover, administration of questionnaires to patients so that they can assess hand hygiene practices and yearly assessments of nurses are other integral plans.

Standardization of hand hygiene practices is a method that is effective in extending successful prevention of infection using evidence-based practices of hand hygiene. Hand hygienic practices include washing using soaps, alcohol-based disinfectants, antimicrobial disinfectants, sanitizers, and sterile gloves. Given that practices of hand hygiene very, standardization of these practices is integral in extending the impact of the project in a healthcare setting. A specific plan to standardize hand hygiene practices is to formulate professional guidelines for healthcare providers to follow and effectively prevent infections. Boyce and Pittet recommend healthcare providers customize their hand hygienic practices based on the occurrence of nosocomial infections and evidence-based practices (3). In this view, the formulation of professional guidelines in response to prevailing infections and evidence standardizes hand hygiene practices among healthcare providers. The second method is the education of all stakeholders in the healthcare system. Brown states that the Iowa model is applicable in transforming organizational culture so that all stakeholders can contribute to change (158). Patients, caregivers, and visitors have the potential of spreading infections, they require training on hand hygiene practices. In this view, the collaboration of healthcare providers, caregivers, patients, and visitors is essential in the prevention of infections.

Methods and Specific Plans to Revise an Unsuccessful Project Solution

One method of revising the unsuccessful project solution is by rewarding healthcare providers, who comply with the hand hygienic practices. Since the high workload and the preference for gloves contribute to poor adherence to hand hygienic practices, rewarding healthcare providers would enhance their adherence. Rewards such as certification and job promotion motivate healthcare providers to comply with evidence-based hand hygiene practices, and thus, transform organizational culture, leading to enhanced efforts in the prevention of nosocomial infections. Rosswurm and Larrabee state that collaboration among healthcare providers plays a central role in the implementation of evidence-based practices (318). The second method to revise the unsuccessful project solution is the education of patients to understand the essence of hand hygiene practices. For patients to evaluate practices of healthcare providers, they require knowledge of hand hygiene practices. In this view, an educated patient would effectively evaluate healthcare providers and provide accurate outcomes. Moreover, educated patients would advocate for proper hand hygienic practices.

To terminate the unsuccessful project solution, the first method entails the dissolution of the program committee. The specific plan is that the dissolution of the program committee entails relieving the program director, nurse educator, and infection control nurse of their duties to signal the termination of the unsuccessful solution. Advertising is the second method that would be applicable in the termination of the project solution. Since extensive advertising using posters and flyers ensured that healthcare providers and patients understand the existence of the project, extensive advertising is also necessary to inform them about the termination of the program. In this case, the specific plan is the placement of posters and flyers to inform healthcare providers and patients about the termination of the project so that they stop preparing for it and anticipating any participation. The third method is informing evaluators and supervisors about the termination of the project. Given that the project had planned to undertake daily, weekly, and yearly monitoring and evaluation, concerned parties need information so that they do not plan to undertake monitoring and evaluation in vain. The fifth method entails dismantling the infrastructure of the training program. The specific plan is the removal of CCTV cameras and washing dispensers placed at strategic locations.

Specific Plans for Feedback and Communication

Given that the project trains and evaluates how healthcare providers comply with hand hygiene requirements in the prevention of infections, it should provide appropriate feedback. Carboneau, Benge, Jaco, and Robinson state that feedback is important in the prevention of nosocomial infections because it enables healthcare providers to understand their practices and make informed changes (63). The plan for feedback is to hold meetings and forums so that the program director can communicate the outcomes of the project. Moreover, the project would prepare brochures, which summarize outcomes, so that healthcare providers can easily access and read outcomes. Erkan, Findik, and Tokuc state that knowledge that nurses acquire during training needs translation so that other healthcare providers can benefit (467). In this case, the project plans to communicate outcomes to healthcare providers in other healthcare centers, medical professional bodies, and infection preventionists. In communicating these outcomes, the project would utilize meetings, forums, seminars, and publications such as journals and magazines. The overall impact of the feedback plan is to inform healthcare providers, professional bodies, and researchers about the state of compliance with the requirements of hand hygiene practices so that they can make appropriate changes.

Barriers in the Chosen Setting and the Plan to Overcome

The first barrier in the chosen setting is the unwillingness of patients to evaluate healthcare providers. Since patients do not understand hand hygiene practices that are applicable in healthcare settings, they are unwilling to evaluate healthcare providers. To overcome this barrier, the project manager would ensure that patients receive appropriate education regarding hand hygienic practices so that they can undertake accurate evaluation and provide robust outcomes. The second barrier that is present in the chosen setting is insufficient resources. The project requires CCTV cameras, hand hygiene facilities, detergents, and water. To overcome this barrier, the project would ensure that these resources are sufficient by collaborating with hospital management and other stakeholders, who have the capacity to supply required resources. The third barrier is poor compliance with training recommendations. To overcome this barrier, the project would enhance compliance by rewarding healthcare providers and availing hand hygienic facilities at strategic locations. Isaacs states that the availability of hand hygiene facilities enhances compliance among health care providers (457). The fourth barrier is biased evaluation of healthcare providers by supervisors and evaluators. To overcome this barrier, the project would undertake anonymous monitoring and evaluation of healthcare providers.

Works Cited

Boyce, Jennifer, and Didier Pittet. “Guideline for hand hygiene in health care settings: recommendations of the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee and the HICPAC/SHEA/APIC/IDSA Hand Hygiene Task Force.” American Journal of Infection Control 30.8 (2002): 1-46. Print.

Brown, Carlton. “The Iowa model of evidence-based practice to promote quality care: an illustrated example in oncology nursing.” Clinical Journal of Oncology Nursing 8.2 (2014): 157-159. Print.

Carboneau, Clark, Eddie Benge, Mary Jaco, and Mary Robinson. “A lean Six Sigma team increases hand hygiene compliance and reduces hospital-acquired MRSA infections by 51%.” Journal for Healthcare Quality 2.1 (2010): 61-70. Print.

Erkan, Tuley, Ummu Findik, and Burcu Tokuc. “Handwashing behavior and nurses’ knowledge after a training program.” International Journal of Nursing Practice 17.3 (2011): 464- 469. Print.

Isaacs, David. “Hand washing.” Journal of Pediatrics and Child Health 48.6 (2012): 457-457. Print.

Rosswurm, Mary, and June Larrabee. “A model for change to evidence-based practice.” Journal of Nursing Scholarship 31.4 (2009): 317-322. Print.