Table 1

Characteristics of the observation sessions and opportunities for hand hygiene across study phases


Phase I
Phase II
P value

Number of observation studies
181
198

Number of opportunities
604
553

Median duration in minutes
12.3
13.0
0.74
     25%–75% percentiles
8.0–17.0
8.5–16.7

HCWa


0.17
     Nurses
132 (73)
134 (68)

     Physicians
29 (16)
29 (14)

     Nursing assistants
12 (6.6)
27 (14)

     Other
8 (4.4)
8 (4)

Time of daya


0.027
     Morning
92 (51)
123 (62)

     Afternoon
89 (49)
75 (38)

Isolated patienta
64 (35)
57 (29)
0.14
Availability of handruba



     In the room
177 (98)
197 (99.5)
0.20
     In the HCW's pocket
16 (9)
17 (9)
0.53
Median number of opportunities per hour
13.7
11.6
0.004
     25%–75% percentiles
8.3–20.6
8.6–16

Type of opportunity


< 0.001
     Respiratory care
40 (6.6)
47 (8.5)

     Intravenous or arterial care
62 (10.3)
60 (10.8)

     Direct patient contact
477 (79.0)
374 (68.0)

     Digestive care
6 (1.0)
12 (2.0)

     Wound care
9 (1.5)
35 (6.0)

     Clean device/material
9 (1.5)
18 (3.2)

     Urinary care
1 (0.2)
7 (1.5)


aData are presented as numbers (percentages). Phase I: use of liquid handrub; phase II: use of gel handrub. HCW, health care worker.

Traore et al. Critical Care 2007 11:R52   doi:10.1186/cc5906

Open Data