Clinical Trials Directory

Trials / Completed

CompletedNCT02396836

Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT) of 6 Versus 3 Steps for Hand Hygiene

Randomised Controlled Trial of the Effectiveness of Two Hand Hygiene Techniques Using Alcohol Based Hand Rub on Hand Surface Coverage and Reducing Bacterial Hand Contamination

Status
Completed
Phase
N/A
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
120 (actual)
Sponsor
Glasgow Caledonian University · Academic / Other
Sex
All
Age
Healthy volunteers
Not accepted

Summary

The aim is to compare the effectiveness of the 6 step hand rub technique versus 3 step hand rub technique in hand coverage and in reducing bacterial contamination on the hands of healthcare workers in practice. Research questions 1. What is the effectiveness of the 6 step technique in hand coverage compared to the 3 step technique? 1. What are the most frequently missed sites in hand surface coverage using 6 steps compared to 3 steps? 2. What is the reduction in bacterial contamination of the hand with the 6 step compared to the 3 step technique? 2. Does site missed or coverage relate to bacterial load? 3. What is the time taken for 6 step technique versus 3 step technique?

Detailed description

The 6 step for decontamination of healthcare workers hand is recommended by the World Health Organization but the 3 step technique is easy to perform and has been shown by some studies to be effective. Compliance with the 6 step technique is not optimum. If the 3 step was more as or more effective than the 6 step compliance with it could be compared with that for the 6 step. No randomised controlled trial comparing the effectiveness of these two techniques using alcohol based hand rub has been conducted.

Conditions

Interventions

TypeNameDescription
OTHER6 step techniqueHand decontamination with alcohol hand rub using the World Health Organizations 6 step technique
OTHER3 step techniqueHand decontamination with alcohol hand rub using the 3 step technique

Timeline

Start date
2013-11-01
Primary completion
2014-03-01
Completion
2014-03-01
First posted
2015-03-24
Last updated
2015-03-24

Locations

1 site across 1 country: United Kingdom

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov record NCT02396836. Inclusion in this directory is not an endorsement.