QUALITY OF PREVENTIVE

MEASURES ADOPTED BY
HEALTHCARE WORKERS TO
PREVENT COMMUNICABLE
DISEASES
BATCH 32
Roll Numbers: 324, 325, 326, 327, 328, 342, 343, 346, 347, 348
SUPERVISOR: DR. FARIHA SALMAN
 1. ABSTRACT
2. INTRODUCTION
OUTLIN 3. OBJECTIVE

E 4. METHODS
5. RESULTS
6. DISCUSSION
7. REFERENCES
 ABSTRACT

❑ Background

❑ Methodology

❑ Results

❑ Conclusion

❑ Keywords

Presented by: 347 and 342

 ❑ Opening paragraph
✔ Statement of general topic
✔ Findings in literature
✔ Gaps in the findings
✔ Aim of study
✔ General statement of study
approach

INTRODUCTION ❑ General literature

❑ Specific area of focus

❑ Unanswered question in the specific

area of research

❑ Research question
Presented by: 325 and 328
INTRODUCTION
• Communicable disease is a raging problem which is faced by healthcare workers(1). It exposes HCW to many blood
borne diseases like AIDS, Hepatitis B , Hepatitis C and air borne diseases like COVID-19 and TB .(2)
• These infections affect the quality of life and even decrease the life expectancy as it’s been seen in recent COVID-19
pandemic as declared by WHO that “thousands of health workers infected with COVID-19 have lost their lives
worldwide”.(3)

• Various studies have been conducted in the past to analyze the quality of methods used to prevent communicable
infectious diseases among HCWs (4). Methods that have been proven effective to minimize infection among HCWs are
vaccine prevention, hand hygiene, post-exposure prophylaxis, and adherence to isolation precautions.

• There are more cases of communicable disease outbreaks in third world countries with low resources leading to less
preventive measures.(5) An exploration in 2006 was done as a partnership developed between occupational health and
infection control experts in Canada and institutions in South Africa which showed that integrated occupational health-
infection control training is needed in workforce and patients alike and it can help in preventing the disease. (6)

• This article will focus on the quality of prevention measures implemented in Healthcare facilities for healthcare workers.
INTRODUCTION (CONT.)
• Preventive measures like the Islamabad Compulsory Vaccination And Protection Of Health Workers Act,
2019 have been implemented from time to time however such measures are highly localized and there is
still a lack of a nationwide prevention program for HCW in Pakistan.
• According to a quantitative study conducted in a major healthcare problem. Sindh, needle stick injury
has been implicated as one of the most common source of infection Further research tried to make an
assessment of the proportion of NSIs and their associated factors among HCWs .(7)
• In conclusion preventive protocols are being revised and reinstated but the results of these measures
remain rather unclear. This has led to an unsupervised spread of communicable diseases among
healthcare workers which in the future may lead to a complete healthcare crisis. For this reason, there is
an absolute need for further research to assess the quality and benefits of preventative measures for
communicable diseases in HCWs to find out areas where special effort might be directed to ensure the
undisrupted provision of healthcare facilities while prioritizing the health of HCW.
OBJECTIVES

❖ To determine the quality of preventive measure adopted by Healthcare workers

in Mayo Hospital Lahore.
 MATERIAL AND METHODS

Presented by: 343 and 346

STUDY DESIGN:
It is a cross sectional study.

SETTIN
G
The study was conducted at King Edward Medical University, Lahore,
Pakistan

STUDY
DURATION:
This study was conducted from March to November 2022.

SAMPLE
SIZE:
The sample size was calculated by using single population
proportion formula. The sample size is 234 in order to get a
confidence interval (CI) of 95% and a margin of error of 5%
through RAOSOFT. (8)
SETTIN
G
The study was conducted at King Edward Medical University, Lahore,
Pakistan

STUDY
DURATION:
This study was conducted from March to November 2022.

SAMPLE
SIZE:
The sample size was calculated by using single population
proportion formula. The sample size is 234 in order to get a
confidence interval (CI) of 95% and a margin of error of 5%
through RAOSOFT. (8)
SAMPLING TECHNIQUE

The sampling technique used was convenient sampling

SAMPLING SELECTION

INCLUSION EXCLUSION

Healthcare workers included MS1 MS2 MS3 MS4 and all students of BDS
MS5 having clinical exposure of at least 2 and Allied Sciences were excluded.
months and House officers , Medical officer ,
Residents Postgraduate doctors and Nurses
working in Mayo hospital.
 DATA COLLECTION

Presented by: 326

 Data collection procedure

Data was collected through Questionnaire which was used after the permission of the authors
of the already published research(8).

• The questionnaire was circulated through social media platforms, WhatsApp and messenger.
Data collection tool:
The data collection tool was a three-part questionnaire.
• The first part included demographic features of healthcare workers
1. Age
2. Sex
3. Marital status
4. Profession
5. History of infection prevention training

• The second part included twenty-five questions with Likert-type scale options ranging from “Always’’ to ‘‘Never’
about infection prevention practices.
1. Handwashing
2. Use of gloves , mask , gown , and googles
3. Post exposure prophylaxis
4. Injection safety
5. Cough Hygiene
6. Instrument processing
• Questionnaires were checked for completeness and consistency.
• The data collection tool was tested for internal consistency (reliability) using Cronbach’s alpha test. The resulting
Cronbach’s alpha value was 0.751 for the practice.
DATA ANALYSIS

Data was analyzed using SPSS-22.

Mean and standard deviation were calculated for numerical variables whereas frequency and
percentage for categorical variables.
Chi-Square test was used for inferential analysis.
Alpha was kept at 0.05.
 RESULTS

❖There were 234 HCW with mean age of 26 , with 33% Male and 66% female. There are 42%
HCW in OPD, 13% in Gynecology and obstetrics unit, 12% in inpatient clinic , 68% in medical
and surgical ward , 29% in pediatrics ward and 8% in OR. ( TABLE 1 )

Presented by: 327

Among the HCW, 131 (55.9%) had good infection
practices and 90 (38.4%) had bad infection practices.
Those HCWs who underwent training on infection
prevention were more likely to have good infection
prevention practices than those who have not taken
any.
 Table 2: Factors associated with infection prevention practices, King Edward Medical College,
Lahore , March to November 2022 (N=234 ).

vVariables Infection Prevention practice status p value

Good Bad

n=131 n= 90

PROFESSION
PR

Doctor
Do 76(54.2%) 64(45.7%) 0.087

NURSE
Nurse/Midwife 40(66.6%) 20(33.3%)

MS5
MS5 15(44.1%) 19(55.8%)

TRAINING ON INFECTION PREVENTION

Yes 90(65.2% 48(34.7%) 0.001* significant

No 41(42.7%) 55(57.2%)
DISCUSSION
• Healthcare Workers, being at the frontline of diagnostic and preventive services, are exposed
to a lot of infectious pathogens responsible for healthcare associated infections (HCAIS).
HCAIs are a raging problem in developing countries like Pakistan where communicable
diseases compose the major portion of disease load. Prevention practices still are the most
promising option to control of such diseases especially for Healthcare workers who occupy a
central position in the dissemination of such infections.
• In this study, more than half (55.9%) Healthcare Workers had good prevention practices .This
result is lower than the study conducted in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia (two by third, 66.6%)
There is a reported gap in the quality of prevention practices between doctors and nurses as
opposed to the results of a similar study conducted in Pak-Emirates Military Hospital,
Rawalpindi, Pakistan in 2019 which although pointed out gap in knowledge of prevention
practices but implied no gap in their practice. The results of our study suggest that nurses had
better quality of prevention as compared to doctors
 DISCUSSION(CONT.)

• The results of our study suggest that nurses had better quality of prevention as compared to doctors. This
could be as a result of better training programs and curriculum differences for nursing staff.
• Our study showed more satisfactory results as compared to previous studies. However, there was a
significant difference between practices of doctors and nurses.
• Furthermore, 5TH Year medical students had poor quality of prevention.

Presented by: 324

WHAT COULD HAVE
INCREASED THE
QUALITY OF
PREVENTION?
CONCLUSION

There is a need for better training programs especially for medical students in their clinical years.
There is also space for improvement in prevention practices more so for doctors than nurses.
Awareness programs, symposiums, training programs may provide better results in prevention of
communicable diseases.
 REFERENCES
1. Communicable Diseases Learning Objectives. 2014 [cited 2022 Apr 23]; Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-
12-415766-8.00004-5

2. AlJohani A, Karuppiah K, Al Mutairi A, Al Mutair A. Narrative review of infection control knowledge and attitude among
healthcare workers. J Epidemiol Glob Health. 2021;11(1):20–5.

3. WHO. WHO Recomended Stategies for the Prevention and Control of Communicable Disease. Dep Commun Disesase,
Control Prev Erad [Internet]. 2001;13:107–10. Available from:
https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/67088/WHO_CDS_CPE_SMT_2001.13.pdf

4. Weber DJ, Rutala WA, Schaffner W. Lessons learned: Protection of healthcare workers from infectious disease risks. Crit
Care Med. 2010;38(8 SUPPL.).

5. Mersha A, Shibiru S, Girma M, Ayele G, Bante A, Kassa M, et al. Health professionals practice and associated factors towards
precautionary measures for COVID-19 pandemic in public health facilities of Gamo zone, southern Ethiopia: A crosssectional study.
PLoS One. 2021;16(3 March):1–10.

6. Yassi A, Zungu M, Spiegel JM, Kistnasamy B, Lockhart K, Jones D, et al. Protecting health workers from infectious disease
transmission: An exploration of a Canadian-South African partnership of partnerships. Global Health [Internet]. 2016;12(1):1–15.
Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12992-016-0145-0

7. Afridi AAK, Kumar A, Sayani R. Needle stick injuries--risk and preventive factors: a study among health care workers in
tertiary care hospitals in Pakistan. Glob J Health Sci [Internet]. 2013 [cited 2022 Apr 23];5(4):85–92. Available from:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23777725/

8. Geberemariyam BS, Donka GM, Wordofa B. Assessment of knowledge and practices of healthcare workers towards infection
prevention and associated factors in healthcare facilities of West Arsi District , Southeast Ethiopia : a facility-based cross-sectional
study. 2018;1–11.
ANY
QUESTIONS?
END.

THANK YOU!