↓ Skip to main content

Barriers to hand hygiene in ophthalmic outpatients in Uganda: a mixed methods approach

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Ophthalmic Inflammation and Infection, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
80 Mendeley
Title
Barriers to hand hygiene in ophthalmic outpatients in Uganda: a mixed methods approach
Published in
Journal of Ophthalmic Inflammation and Infection, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12348-016-0077-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rachel Mearkle, Rebecca Houghton, Dan Bwonya, Robert Lindfield

Abstract

Healthcare-associated infection rates are high in low-income countries and are associated with significant morbidity. There is a paucity of published data on infection control practice, attitudes or resources in these settings, particularly in ophthalmology. The aim of this study is to understand current hand washing practices, barriers to hand washing and facilities available in two Ugandan specialist eye hospitals. This study was undertaken through non-participant observations of healthcare worker hand washing practices, documentation of hand hygiene facilities and semi-strucutured interviews with clinical staff. Eighty percent of the WHO opportunities for hand washing were missed through lack of attempted hand hygiene measures. Facilities for hand hygiene were inadequate with some key clinical areas having no provisions for hand hygiene. Training on effective hand hygiene varied widely with some staff reporting no training at all. The staff did not perceive the lack of facilities to be a barrier to hand washing but reported forgetfulness, lack of time and a belief that they could predict when transmission might occur and therefore did not wash hands as often as recommended. Hand hygiene at the two observed sites did not comply with WHO-recommended standards. The lack of facilities, variable training and staff perceptions were observable barriers to effective hand hygiene. Simple, low-cost interventions to improve hand hygiene could include increased provision of hand towels and running water and improved staff education to challenge their views and perceived barriers to hand hygiene.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 80 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 23%
Student > Bachelor 13 16%
Other 6 8%
Researcher 6 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 8%
Other 16 20%
Unknown 15 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 24%
Environmental Science 5 6%
Social Sciences 4 5%
Unspecified 3 4%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 17 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 March 2016.
All research outputs
#20,315,221
of 22,856,968 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Ophthalmic Inflammation and Infection
#139
of 185 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#276,498
of 326,713 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Ophthalmic Inflammation and Infection
#5
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,856,968 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 185 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 326,713 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.