Centre for Evidence-Based Practice (CEBaP), Belgian Red Cross, Motstraat 42, Mechelen, Belgium.
Belgian Red Cross, Mechelen, Belgium.
BMC Public Health. 2021 Sep 25;21(1):1745. doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-11815-4.
Public health strategies in the context of respiratory droplet-transmissible diseases (such as influenza or COVID-19) include intensified hand hygiene promotion, but a review on the effectiveness of different ways of promoting hand hygiene in the community, specifically for this type of infections, has not been performed. This rapid systematic review aims to summarize the effectiveness of community-based hand hygiene promotion programs on infection transmission, health outcomes and behavioral outcomes during epidemic periods in the context of respiratory droplet-transmissible diseases. We also included laboratory-confirmed health outcomes for epidemic-prone disease during interepidemic periods.
We searched for controlled experimental studies. A rapid systematic review was performed in three databases and a COVID-19 resource. Following study selection (in which studies performed in the (pre-)hospital/health care setting were excluded), study characteristics and effect measures were synthesized, using meta-analyses of cluster-RCTs where possible. Risk of bias of each study was assessed and the certainty of evidence was appraised according to the GRADE methodology.
Out of 2050 unique references, 12 cluster-RCTs, all in the context of influenza, were selected. There were no controlled experimental studies evaluating the effectiveness of hand hygiene promotion programs in the context of COVID-19 that met the in-/exclusion criteria. There was evidence that preventive hand hygiene promotion interventions in interepidemic periods significantly decreased influenza positive cases in the school setting. However, no improvement could be demonstrated for programs implemented in households to prevent secondary influenza transmission from previously identified cases (epidemic and interepidemic periods).
The data suggest that proactive hand hygiene promotion interventions, i.e. regardless of the identification of infected cases, can improve health outcomes upon implementation of such a program, in contrast to reactive interventions in which the program is implemented after (household) index cases are identified.
呼吸道飞沫传播疾病(如流感或 COVID-19)的公共卫生策略包括加强手部卫生宣传,但尚未对社区中促进手部卫生的不同方法的有效性进行综述,特别是针对此类感染。本快速系统评价旨在总结呼吸道飞沫传播疾病流行期间,社区为基础的手部卫生促进计划对感染传播、健康结果和行为结果的有效性。我们还纳入了流行疾病在流行间期的实验室确诊健康结果。
我们检索了对照实验研究。在三个数据库和一个 COVID-19 资源中进行了快速系统评价。在进行研究选择(排除了在(院前)/医疗保健环境中进行的研究)后,综合了研究特征和效果指标,尽可能对群组 RCT 进行荟萃分析。根据 GRADE 方法评估了每项研究的偏倚风险,并评估了证据的确定性。
在 2050 个独特的参考文献中,选择了 12 项群组 RCT,均在流感背景下进行。没有符合纳入/排除标准的评估 COVID-19 中手部卫生促进计划有效性的对照实验研究。有证据表明,在流行间期,预防性手部卫生促进干预措施可显著减少学校环境中的流感阳性病例。然而,在家庭中实施的旨在预防先前确定的病例(流行期和流行间期)继发性流感传播的计划,并没有显示出改善效果。
数据表明,主动的手部卫生促进干预措施,即无论是否识别出感染者,都可以改善此类计划实施后的健康结果,而不是在(家庭)索引病例确定后实施的被动干预措施。