Paper Example on Analyzing Transmission Risks: Healthcare Workers and Portable Medical Equipment

1. Jinadatha, C., Villamaria, F. C., Coppin, J. D., Dale, C. R., Williams, M. D., Whitworth, R., & Stibich, M. (2017). Interaction of healthcare worker hands and portable medical equipment: a sequence analysis to show potential transmission opportunities. BMC infectious diseases, 17(1), 800. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5745722/ Doi: 10.1186/s12879-017-2895-6One and Systematic review

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

2. Suarez, Z. M. S., Oducado, R. M., Josue, E. L., Gayoso, T. L., Ocate, C. A., & Lujan, J. J. (2019). Infection Control Practice on Vital Signs Equipment: A Survey Among Senior Nursing Students in Iloilo City, Philippines. Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 7(2), 56-62. DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.8165969 Three and Systematic review

3. Alhmidi, H., John, A., Mana, T. C., Koganti, S., Cadnum, J. L., Shelton, M. B., & Donskey, C. J. (2017). Evaluation of viral surrogate markers for the study of pathogen dissemination during simulations of patient care. In Open Forum Infectious Diseases (Vol. 4, No. 3, p. ofx128). US: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofx128 Four and Systematic review

4. Gokalp, H., de Folter, J., Verma, V., Fursse, J., Jones, R., & Clarke, M. (2018). Integrated telehealth and telecare for monitoring frail elderly with chronic disease. Telemedicine and e-Health, 24(12), 940-957. Seven and Systematic review

5. Fernando, S. A., Gray, T. J., & Gottlieb, T. (2017). Healthcareacquired infections: prevention strategies. Internal Medicine Journal, 47(12), 1341-1351. https://doi.org/10.1111/imj.13642 Two and expert opinion

6. Link, T., Kleiner, C., Mancuso, M. P., Dziadkowiec, O., & Halverson-Carpenter, K. (2016). Determining high touch areas in the operating room with levels of contamination. American journal of infection control, 44(11), 1350-1355. Seven and Quantitative review

Evidence Summary

In article number one also in level 1 systematic review, the author states that from their findings from the 144 hours they did their observation, they found out different sequences of the number of touches (Jinadatha et al., 2017). From the patient rooms, there were 850 touches from which 213 contacts were from the vital machines. It means that there are about two touches within an hour, and thus the rate of infection transfer is very high. More touches were recorded according to what the authors entailed, with COW recording the highest number with 634 touches made. Therefore, there is no exception from one room to another that the machines will not transmit the infections from the data gathered.

In the second article, also in level 3 systematic review, the author states that equipment or apparatuses in a specific room are vehicles for carrying pathogens. Stethoscopes, blood pressure tools, and thermometers are highly considered and well known for transmitting diseases. There are very many other devices which are interacted within the room and are not considered to transmit diseases by many. These devices are very dangerous because they are ignored to carry pathogens and can infect many people quickly. Therefore, no tool in a nursing room is safer than the other, and therefore consideration needs to be taken (Suarez et al., 2019).

In the third article also in level 3 systematic review, the authors state that infections passed through the bare hands are rare than those from the surface. Different experiments made showed that infections could stay on surfaces for days and later infect another person. Since the patient has very low immunity, it is easy for them to be infected and their condition to worsen than the healthy people. Therefore, a vital machine not in use, if not well sanitized, will transmit the infection from one patient to another very easily, which may end the patient's life (Alhmidi et al., 2017).

In the fourth article also in level 4 expert opinion, the authors suggest that using the same machine with the different patient does not only transmit disease but cause an error inpatient management (Gokalp et al., 2018). If the nurse handling the device dos not have prior knowledge on how to use this device, he will end up storing wrong information about the patient. Therefore, sharing vital sign devices has more problems related to the patient if not supervised and accessed correctly.

In the fifth article, also in level 4 expert opinion, the author also describes how infections are transmitted from one person to another (Fernando et al., 2017). He states that infections in a hospital environment can be transmitted in ways that no one would imagine. Sharing of equipment without proper sanitation leads to infection transfer, and some of the devices are hard to detect or regularly sanitize. The need to use different tools in different rooms ensures that the patient's health is kept safe, and no unnecessary infection is acquired.

In the last article, also in level 7 quantitative review, the author defines and researches the most touched surfaces in the hospital rooms (Link et al., 2016). There is very much equipment touched from one area to the other, but most of them are highly sanitized and not reusable. According to the author, vital sign machines are not well sanitized, and they are regularly used in the rooms. They are also shared from one room to the other without much consideration of the impact they can have on the health of the patient. Moving the machine from one room increases the chances of spreading pathogens and viruses to the next patient.

Recommendation based on the evidence summary developed

In article number one also in level 1 systematic review, the author recommended that the best way to use is ensuring that the doctor use gloves and regularly sanitize the machines. Since many activities within a minute are going on inside award, the process becomes very hard to do. It is very hard to instruct the patient or any visitor to sanitize the machines after touching them since they are not aware of the danger. The data showed that 1.2 times of the machine encounter from both sides left a space for infection transfer (Jinadatha et al., 2017).

In the second article also in level 3 systematic review, the author recommends that each tool should be handled with great measure and infection control measures to be carried. Hospitalization can be used to ensure that great measures and infection control are achieved at all costs. This means that sanitizing all the equipment after use to prevent a person to person transmission, which easily occurs. There should be no exception to any tool since one mistake can cause the health of the patient to be at risk (Suarez et al., 2019).

In the third article also in level 3 systematic review, the author recommends that great measures and considerations be taken care of while dealing with any equipment. Some of the tools may not be considered as infections, but in the real sense, they can worsen the patient's health. Proper sanitation is highly considered with each tool used following a line of making sure that they are safe. Our eyes cannot see bacteria, virus germ, and other infections, but they can be present and always ready to transmit any disease (Alhmidi et al., 2017).

In the fourth article, also in level 3 systematic review, the author also recommends caution and installation of vital devices in each room. The author understands the risk associated with having multiple patients sharing machines or devices in the hospital environment. In the last article, also in level 7 quantitative review, the authors recommend that minimizing the transfer of tools from one room to the other or making sure that they are well sanitized. Every person entering the room and leaving is required to sanitize, and nurses and doctors required to wear gloves while interacting with machines. If this is not observed, the patient's health will always be in danger, and the cause of the infections will not be traced. Most of the hospitals have enough resources to use at each ward, and therefore they prefer sharing that is not in use to maximize the use of resources.

Practice change model that is appropriate to apply to the proposed practice change

Justification of the change

According to the research conducted, it is clear that the methods used for sharing the equipment in the hospital environment constitute infection transmission. Having each room installed with a vital machine will decrease the infection transmission rates. Even though this method is so expensive compared to sharing, the health of the patients will be considered, and they will not be infected with pathogens from the hospital. The hospital environment should always be clean and safe for any patient, and therefore the project entails improving the patient health. The project is a guarantee that the infection transmission will go down as the chances of transmission will greatly go down.

Identified model to guide the implementation of the proposed practice change

The most effective model in this project is pilot change, where the organization will incorporate the new change to different parts of the hospital. The model is most appropriate because of the cost minimization and showing results to the management. The project requires a huge amount of money to fully implement everything, but with the use of pilot change, the hospital can implement the change in parts. After this is done, the management will evaluate the project's success, which they will implement in the next phase. The change need t follow the following step to ensure that it is successful and less costly than before:

• Hypothesis creation
• Experimentation the stage
• Pilot communication execution
• Capturing the feedback
• Pilot shuttering
• Findings presentation.

Barriers to the successful implementation of the proposed practice change

One of the main barriers to implementing this change is buying and maintaining all the tools needed. The team needs to install each tool to be used in one room and not to be shared in any other ward. The tools need to be sanitized well each day, and every time the patient is released from the ward. Contact from one patient to another through these tools to be minimized in all the ways possible. Therefore, it means that the number of tools used in the medical area needs to be increased and be installed in each room. Purchasing this equipment requires a huge amount of money, which may not be available at a given time, hindering the project's success. The organization has to budget for the equipment and wait for money allocations and the procurement department to purchase the medical equipment.

Maintaining all the equipment installed maybe a problem and required a huge number of staff that may not be available. Because of mass equipment, there will be a need to hire more staff to maintain and ensure that they are running when required. As stated, this will cost the organizations a huge amount of money and thus preferring not to use the proposed methods in their organization. A huge number of people are offered jobs. The organizations also need to keep running and have different other projects which are budgeted every year. The need for change in the medical department and the motive behind this change will provide a stronger reason to accept and run the project. Having more devices will reduce the transmission rates and therefore keep staff and the patients safe.

Possible ethical implications that may arise while planning or implementing the proposed practice change

According to the ANA code of ethics provision three, "the nurse promotes, advocates for, and protects the rights, health, and safety of the patient." In sections four and five,...