The nosocomial infections refer to the hospital-acquired diseasesthat are not present when the patient is admitted to the hospital. Inmost cases, the patients will acquire the infections while they arestill staying in the hospital (Lake et al., 2016). It is a problemsince it leads to the nurses dealing with more infections and it alsoaffects the recovery process. In fact, the unhygienic conditions inthe hospital setting have been one of the leading causes of thenosocomial infections, and that shows the need to implementcorrective measures instead.
The Clinical Setting
The high number of cancer cases has led to the advanced technologyfinding ways to control its severity. However, the nosocomialinfections have been a cause of the increased morbidity among thecancer patients. The infections spread easily since the use of thechemotherapy often uses immunosuppression that increases thevulnerability of the cancer patients to such illnesses (Lake et al.,2016). The way that they interact with the healthcare setting,especially the nurses often increases the chances of the nosocomialinfections. The surgical procedures that include the intravascularaccess devices and other unhygienic conditions often increase theirchances of getting the nosocomial infections.
Impact of NosocomialInfection on the Work Environment
The nosocomial infections are known to increase the morbidity and themortality rate in an oncology setting. In some cases, the respectivehealth insurance of the patients has to spend some millions ofdollars to cater for the extra days that the patients will spend. Thenurses will have to treat multiple infections at a time, which is adraining experience for the patient. The hospital might lose itsclients since the patients will believe that the nurses and themanagement are careless (Marwati et al., 2016). Hence, there is theneed to reduce such infections to enhance the likelihood of thepatients undergoing the required recovery and staying for fewer days.
Gravity of theNosocomial Infection and its Impact to Nursing
The nurses, as well as other healthcare providers, are supposed tocomply with the standard protocols that insist on the hand hygiene.However, in most cases, they fail to follow such protocols, and thatleads to a high rate of the nosocomial infections in an oncologyunit. Hence, the intervention will improve the nurses’ outcome andreduce the nosocomial infections.
Solution to theNosocomial Infection
Hand hygiene hasbeen considered as one of the causes of the nosocomial infections inthe oncology setting. However, the current measures that includewashing hands with soap seem inappropriate since the rate of theinfections has not reduced. The CDC and the WHO has revealed that thealcohol-based hand rubbing solution will reduce the nosocomialinfections in the oncology setting (King et al., 2016). Researchproves that it removes nearly all the microorganisms that might causeinfections within a less time.
Is the alcohol-basedsolution effective in improving hand hygiene and minimizing thenosocomial infection in an oncology unit in comparison to the typicalsoap and water hand washing procedure? Population – Oncologypatients in the emergency departmentIntervention – The use ofthe alcohol-based solution in enhancing hand hygiene Comparison– The use of the routine soap and water in improving the handhygieneOutcome – minimize the rate of the nosocomialinfection Time – When one is hospitalized
King, D., Vlaev, I., Everett-Thomas, R., Fitzpatrick, M., Darzi, A.,& Birnbach, D. J. (2016). “Priming” hand hygiene compliancein clinical environments. Health Psychology, 35(1), 96.
Lake, E. T., Hallowell, S. G., Kutney-Lee, A., Hatfield, L. A., DelGuidice, M., Boxer, B. A., … & Aiken, L. H. (2016). Higherquality of care and patient safety associated with better NICU workenvironments. Journal of nursing care quality, 31(1),24-32.
Marwati, T., Subiyanto, A. A., Mardikanto, T., Priyambodo, P.,Wibowo, M., & Qomariyah, N. (2016). The Impact of Surgical SiteInfection to the Health Care Cost. International Journal of PublicHealth Science (IJPHS), 5(2), 129-133.