Skip to main content

Table 2 Descriptive characteristics of the included healthcare facilities participating in the HHEA. HHSAF data refers to years 2017–2023, while ABHR consumption data and average compliance include figures from 2012 to 2021. Healthcare facilities are taken as statistical units, and data are presented as medians and IQRs for the overall set, as well as stratified by management type and by region. Multiple comparisons between regions were performed in the event of a p < 0.10 after the Kruskal-Wallis test

From: Ten years of hand hygiene excellence: a summary of outcomes, and a comparison of indicators, from award-winning hospitals worldwide

Variable

Overall

Management

General/University/Teaching

Private

p-value

Asia-Pacific

Europe

Latin America

p-value

Size (number of beds)

235 [128–441]

320 [206–672]

148 [90–253]

< 0.001

550 [252–1260]

362 [164–509]

161 [107–320]

< 0.001

ABHR consumption (average, in ml/PD)

31.9 [19.7–62.7]

31.9 [18.4–63.6]

31.3 [21.3–63.2]

0.901

24.1 [10.4–39.0]

34.0 [21.5–55.7]

42.3 [22.0–66.7]

0.087#

Average hand hygiene compliance (%)

71.6 [59.2–80.6]

67.4 [53.1–80.3]

70.7 [66.3–78.9]

0.502

72.4 [69.7–80.0]

79.3 [72.0–82.4]

65.8 [55.1–80.2]

0.057§

WHO HHSAF

System change

100 [95–100]

100 [80–100]

100 [100–100]

N.A.*

100 [100–100]

100 [100–100]

100 [85–100]

N.A.*

Education & Training

95 [80–100]

95 [82.5–100]

90 [80–100]

0.336

100 [92.5–100]

95 [80–100]

90 [80–100]

0.086#

Evaluation & Feedback

90 [80–95]

85 [72.5–95]

95 [85–95]

0.056

95 [87.5–100]

87.5 [80–95]

85 [75–95]

0.023#

Reminders in workplace

90 [80–100]

90 [80–95]

90 [67.5–100]

0.388

95 [87.5–100]

95 [82.5–100]

87.5 [67.5–95]

0.026#

Safety Climate

85 [70–95]

85 [70–90]

90 [77.5–95]

0.436

90 [82.5–100]

80 [62.5–90]

85 [70–90]

0.031

Total HHSAF score

445 [395–480]

435 [387.5–472.5]

455 [395–485]

0.233

475 [447.5–490]

442.5 [417.5–475]

432.5 [380–467.5]

< 0.001#

  1. Significant differences were found between Latin America and Europe, and between Latin America and Asia-Pacific
  2. #A significant difference was found between Latin America and Asia-Pacific
  3. §A significant difference was found between Latin America and Europe
  4. *The Kruskal-Wallis test could not be performed, owing to the high number of ties (most values were equal to the maximum score of 100 points)
  5. Significant differences were found between Asia-Pacific and Europe, and between Asia-Pacific and Latin America