MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2997292915 · doi:10.1186/s13756-019-0666-4

Train-the-Trainers in hand hygiene: a standardized approach to guide education in infection prevention and control

2019· article· en· W2997292915 on OpenAlexaff
Ermira Tartari, Carolina Fankhauser, Sarah Masson-Roy, Hilda Márquez-Villarreal, Inmaculada Fernández Moreno, Ma Luisa Rodriguez Navas, Odet Sarabia, Fernando Bellissimo‐Rodrigues, Marcela Hernández-de Mezerville, Yew Fong Lee, Mohammad Hassan Aelami, Shaheen Mehtar, Américo Agostinho, Liberato Camilleri, Benedetta Allegranzi, Daniela Pires, Didier Pittet

Bibliographic record

VenueAntimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfection Control in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsCégep de Lévis
FundersUniversité de GenèveFaculté de Médecine, Université de GenèveAesculap AkademieWorld Health OrganizationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMedicineHygieneWilcoxon signed-rank testHealth professionalsTest (biology)Family medicineInfection controlEnvironmental healthInternal medicineHealth careSurgeryMann–Whitney U test

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Harmonization in hand hygiene training for infection prevention and control (IPC) professionals is lacking. We describe a standardized approach to training, using a "Train-the-Trainers" (TTT) concept for IPC professionals and assess its impact on hand hygiene knowledge in six countries. METHODS: We developed a three-day simulation-based TTT course based on the World Health Organization (WHO) Multimodal Hand Hygiene Improvement Strategy. To evaluate its impact, we have performed a pre-and post-course knowledge questionnaire. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare the results before and after training. RESULTS: Between June 2016 and January 2018 we conducted seven TTT courses in six countries: Iran, Malaysia, Mexico, South Africa, Spain and Thailand. A total of 305 IPC professionals completed the programme. Participants included nurses (n = 196; 64.2%), physicians (n = 53; 17.3%) and other health professionals (n = 56; 18.3%). In total, participants from more than 20 countries were trained. A significant (p < 0.05) improvement in knowledge between the pre- and post-TTT training phases was observed in all countries. Puebla (Mexico) had the highest improvement (22.3%; p < 0.001), followed by Malaysia (21.2%; p < 0.001), Jalisco (Mexico; 20.2%; p < 0.001), Thailand (18.8%; p < 0.001), South Africa (18.3%; p < 0.001), Iran (17.5%; p < 0.001) and Spain (9.7%; p = 0.047). Spain had the highest overall test scores, while Thailand had the lowest pre- and post-scores. Positive aspects reported included: unique learning environment, sharing experiences, hands-on practices on a secure environment and networking among IPC professionals. Sustainability was assessed through follow-up evaluations conducted in three original TTT course sites in Mexico (Jalisco and Puebla) and in Spain: improvement was sustained in the last follow-up phase when assessed 5 months, 1 year and 2 years after the first TTT course, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The TTT in hand hygiene model proved to be effective in enhancing participant's knowledge, sharing experiences and networking. IPC professionals can use this reference training method worldwide to further disseminate knowledge to other health care workers.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.287 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations50
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAntimicrobial Resistance and Infection ControlSame topicInfection Control in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207