Unit-Specific Rates of Hand Hygiene Opportunities in an Acute-Care Hospital
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To explore the frequency of hand hygiene opportunities (HHOs) in multiple units of an acute-care hospital. DESIGN Prospective observational study. SETTING The adult intensive care unit (ICU), medical and surgical step-down units, medical and surgical units, and the postpartum mother-baby unit (MBU) of an academic acute-care hospital during May-August 2013, May-July 2014, and June-August 2015. PARTICIPANTS Healthcare workers (HCWs). METHODS HHOs were recorded using direct observation in 1-hour intervals following Public Health Ontario guidelines. The frequency and distribution of HHOs per patient hour were determined for each unit according to time of day, indication, and profession. RESULTS In total, 3,422 HHOs were identified during 586 hours of observation. The mean numbers of HHOs per patient hour in the ICU were similar to those in the medical and surgical step-down units during the day and night, which were higher than the rates observed in medical and surgical units and the MBU. The rate of HHOs during the night significantly decreased compared with day (P92% of HHOs on medical and surgical units, compared to 67% of HHOs on the MBU. CONCLUSIONS Assessment of hand hygiene compliance using product utilization data requires knowledge of the appropriate opportunities for hand hygiene. We have provided a detailed characterization of these estimates across a wide range of inpatient settings as well as an examination of temporal variations in HHOs. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:411-416.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".