Hand Hygiene-Article Critique

HandHygiene-Article Critique

HandHygiene-Article Critique

Thisarticle mainly focuses on hand hygiene (HH). According to thisarticle, the hand hygiene remains as one of the appropriate measuresto prevent the any associated infection (Alsubaie et al., 2013). Eventhough the hand hygiene method is used to prevent the infection, itis obvious that the rates of complying are very low. While exploringthe topic estimated the degree of compliance among the workers ofhealth care and then found out the issues that are concerned withnon-compliance (Alsubaie et al., 2013).

Fromthe article, the research tradition that was employed is indeedcongruent with the various methods that were employed in thecollection as well as analysis of data. The research design employedwas correlational in nature. This research design in broad terms canbe affirmed to be quantitative in nature. The research design wasappropriate as the methods used in the collection of data mainlyconcerned observation. Some of the variables that were collectedthrough the research design employed included the HH compliance(Alsubaie et al., 2013).

Arguably,for proper study and results to obtained the researcher has to spendquality time with the research objects, who are the researchparticipants. In this study, adequate time was indeed spent with theresearch participants. The researcher spent their time with theresearch participants when collecting information. The collection ofinformation was done by either one or two observers every shift ineach UCI (Alsubaie et al., 2013). Every observation period spent bythe researcher took approximately 2 hours, and the sessions happenedthroughout the day. Even though it might not be possible to observethe hand hygiene practices by health care workers (HCWs) within 2hours, but having the sessions spread throughout the day raiseschances of the researcher getting the right information (Alsubaie etal., 2013). Further, the research was designed to in a manner thatfatigue and loss of data would be minimized. This was done byensuring that at any given session, only one patient was beingobserved, and there was no observation of HCWs simultaneously.

Inthe study design that was used, flexibility was part of the study.Even though the study limited to having a 2-patient limit, each daywas divided into 12 observations, and the observers would make theirobservations at will. Having the observations set at random isappropriate as it allows the researcher to be flexible in makingtheir observation. The flexibility is also affirmed by the randomselection of ICU room. There was no fixed order in which the patientswould be examined, rather, they were examined on the First-come,first-serve basis (Alsubaie et al., 2013). This means that thepatients that were approached first by the HCWs during anyobservation period would be observed first. The study did not alsomake it mandatory for the participants mapped or chosen to bestudied. The study, in fact, was flexible enough, and the patientsthat required special isolation precautions were never included inthe study (Alsubaie et al., 2013). Therefore, taking part in thestudy was not mandatory.

Forany research to be carried out, target group has to be defined. Thetarget group often is the population of interest. The population andthe setting as well as the sample in the study as sufficientlydescribed in details. From the study, it is affirmed that theobservation of HH compliance was carried out in different ICUs of theKing Khalid University Hospital (Alsubaie et al., 2013). Thishospital is located in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. This description is aclear indication of the setting of the research area. The populationto be observed is described comprehensively in the study and amongother things, the discussions of the group entail the division intodifferent groups within the ICU (Alsubaie et al., 2013).

Toaddress the research problem, the researcher had no option but to useappropriate research sampling method. In this study, random samplingwas used. In using this type of sampling, chances of biases arereduced. Having 242 HCWs being observed and thus, all of them takingpart was the best (Alsubaie et al., 2013). This means that the samplesize used was adequate, and saturation in the study was achieved.

Themethod of data collection was through observation. The observationwas the most appropriate method as it would match with WHO’s FiveMoments for Hand Hygiene (Alsubaie et al., 2013). Through theobservation, the researchers got first-hand information devoid ofmanipulation or interferences. The method used for data collectionwas just one hence achieving triangulation was not possible.

Inthe study, the research questions asked are not mentioned. In fact,the researcher entirely relied on observation. The observation hadparameters that guided it. The data collected was sufficient and veryrich as it would help make an informed decision in regards tocompliance level of individuals. The data collection methods, as wellas the recording, are appropriate for this study. Data collection wasdone in the best way to minimize bias. First, the research objectswere not aware that they were being observed and hence they would notpretend or modify their behaviors. Additionally, all the HCWs wereinvolved in the study and thus reduced the chances of favoritism(Alsubaie et al., 2013). The use of random sampling also helpedminimize biases in the study. The ICU would be chosen randomly. Toensure that the study remained trustworthy, the researcher hadethical considerations when collecting the data. The ethicalconsiderations also guided the study (Alsubaie et al., 2013).

Giventhat the data collected was quantitative in nature, the statisticalanalysis applied was appropriate for the study. Through the analysis,the degree of non-compliance would be established. The analysiscarried out yielded into some thematic pattern. The results pointed,for instance to high HH compliance in urban settings. By using aconfidence interval of 95% in the study when carrying out analysis isan indicator that there was some errors or possible bias in the study(Alsubaie et al., 2013).

Thefindings from the study were properly summarized. The summary wasdone in regards to the factors that that are linked with HHnoncompliance. Arguments were tied to the results as a way ofvalidating them. Through the analysis, meaning was made from the datacollected. The study is helpful and constructive to many, especiallywithin the nursing practice. It can help inform the policies to beput in place to ensure HCWs compliance with HH practices. Thecondition under which the study has been carried out validates thefindings.


Alsubaie,S., bin Maither, A., Alalmaei, W., Al-Shammari, A. D., Tashkandi, M.,Somily, A. M., … &amp BinSaeed, A. A. (2013). Determinants of handhygiene noncompliance in intensive care units.&nbspAmericanjournal of infection control,&nbsp41(2),131-135.