Infection Control Today

SEP 2018

ICT delivers to infection preventionists & their colleagues in the operating room, sterile processing/central sterile, environmental services & materials management, timely & relevant news, trends & information impacting the profession & the industry

Issue link: http://digital.infectioncontroltoday.com/i/1014266

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 12 of 44

12 ICT September 2018 www.infectioncontroltoday.com out by employees of the healthcare setting (57 percent), followed by employees of an external contractor (34 percent); in 9 percent of institutions responsibilities were shared between internal staff and contractors. The researchers report that among the facilities reporting that healthcare personnel were responsible for cleaning the areas outside of patients' rooms on the ward, 82 percent said that the institution's dedicated cleaners were responsible, 14 percent that nursing staff were responsible, and in 4 percent the role was shared by nursing staff and dedicated cleaners. The healthcare personnel responsible for the cleaning and disinfection of shared equipment were nurses (89 percent), cleaning staff (41 percent), physicians (20 percent), and other personnel (23 percent) — meaning staff members who used the equipment, according to survey participants. Regarding training, the researchers report that 70 percent of facilities train at employment; 46 percent received yearly training, 15 percent twice yearly, and 20 percent sporadic training. Routine room cleaning was performed daily in 92 percent of surveyed facilities; in 2 percent it was performed twice weekly, in 2 percent weekly, and 4 percent used a different cleaning frequency (i.e. twice daily or no routine cleaning). Of the respondents, 92 percent cleaned 'high-touch' surfaces (e.g. bedside table, remote control) daily, 1 percent cleaned these twice weekly, 2 percent weekly, and 5 percent had another frequency than the aforementioned (i.e. twice daily or no routine cleaning). Enhanced cleaning and/or disinfection practices while patients are under contact precautions (e.g. MDRO) varied. This included no extra cleaning (15 percent), extra cleaning in outbreaks only (31 percent), cleaning more frequently (19 percent), disinfection added to regular cleaning (9 percent), extra cleaning and disinfection (26 percent). Most respondents relied only on daily visual monitoring for the assessment of cleaning (47 percent). The researchers call for a "reference standard that is accessible and appropriate to both high- and low-income countries. This standard could include a minimum and full package to make it feasible for both high- and low-resource countries." Barriers and Perceptions of Environmental Cleaning Pedersen, et al. (2018) studied environ- mental services (EVS) professionals' perceptions and knowledge of environmental cleaning using an anonymous Likert scale survey. A total of 118 surveys were collected (response rate, 47 percent). In terms of demographics, the researchers found that 41 percent of respondents were aged 40 years or younger, 48 percent had been employed for fewer than two years, and 8 percent were supervisors. As the researchers note, "Regardless of age, position, or experience, most respondents believe that environmental cleaning is important for infection prevention. They are also open to having regular classes on cleaning." Survey questions included the following, with the percentage of respondents agreeing with the statement: • Terminal cleaning is important to prevent the spread of infection: 97 percent • Daily cleaning is important to prevent the spread of infection: 97 percent • The people I work with think cleaning is important for patient safety: 97 percent • Doctors respect my work: 81 percent • Nurses respect my work: 84 percent • I am a valuable member of the healthcare team: 95 percent • My job is important for patient safety: 99 percent • If my loved one or I were a patient here, I would be satisfi ed with the terminal cleaning performed: 89 percent • I feel rushed to clean rooms quickly so another patient can use the room: 61 percent Environmental Cleaning: A Round-Up of Reports from the Medical Literature cover story By Kelly M. Pyrek W o r k h a b i t s o f e n v i r o n m e n t a l services professionals as well as their perceptions of the profession are among the topics addressed by recent studies in the literature. Let's examine the fi ndings of some research from the U.S. and around the world. Global Environmental Hygiene Environmental hygiene in healthcare institutions vary, as one might expect, and development of guideline recommendations for cleaning and disinfection could improve practices and set minimum standards worldwide, according to Kenters, et al. (2018), who designed a 30-question survey to evaluate differences in healthcare facility cleaning practices around the world. The survey was completed by infection preventionists (68 percent), ID physicians (13 percent), clinical microbiologists (6 percent), facility managers (2 percent), and other healthcare professionals (11 percent). A total of 110 healthcare profes- sionals, representing 23 countries, participated in the online survey. Ninety-six percent of the facilities partic- ipating in the survey had a written cleaning policy for clinical areas and 82 percent had a policy for shared clinical equipment. Ninety percent of the facilities had a cleaning policy in place for the operating theatre; 6 percent of respondents were not sure. When surveyed as to which healthcare personnel were responsible for cleaning of clinical areas, it was found that this was mostly carried

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of Infection Control Today - SEP 2018