dc.contributor.author | Mitchell, Brett G | |
dc.contributor.author | Williams, Anthony | |
dc.contributor.author | Wong, Zorana | |
dc.contributor.author | O'Connor, Jayne | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2017-10-17T01:54:36Z | |
dc.date.available | 2017-10-17T01:54:36Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2017 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 2468-0451 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1016/j.idh.2017.06.003 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10072/348921 | |
dc.description.abstract | Introduction: Assessing the functionality and infection control implications of new
technologies presents significant challenges. In this discussion paper, we present our approach
to assessing infection control aspects of a new isolation room, the RediRoom (prototype). We
report how we evaluated this room, lessons learnt and suggestions for future evaluations in this
area.
Methods: There is no documented method for evaluating a novel temporary isolation room. We
combined a range of existing tools to undertake a technical assessment. Three approaches
were used, an assessment against standards or guidelines; professional assessment; and a
cleaning assessment.
Results: To assess compliance against existing recommendations related to the built environment
and isolation rooms, elements contained within Australasian and United Kingdom
guidelines were used. We were able to identify which elements in these guidelines were
of the most value and relevance. An ultraviolet (UV) solution with fluorescent light assessment
was used to assess the ability to clean surfaces. This approach was a useful objective
measure. A professional assessment is potentially subjective, but provides an opportunity to
identify other potential issues and benefits. In this study, the RediRoom performed well
against all three approaches. We identified limitations in using existing guidelines for a temporary
isolation room. Conclusion: In our study, the use of video and video reflexive ethnography for the professional
assessment would have been useful. We propose a revised list of assessment against
which new isolation solutions or technologies could be assessed, with the view of others
continuing to build on this. | |
dc.description.peerreviewed | Yes | |
dc.language | English | |
dc.language.iso | eng | |
dc.publisher | Elsevier | |
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom | 129 | |
dc.relation.ispartofpageto | 135 | |
dc.relation.ispartofissue | 3 | |
dc.relation.ispartofjournal | Infection, Disease & Health | |
dc.relation.ispartofvolume | 22 | |
dc.subject.fieldofresearch | Health services and systems not elsewhere classified | |
dc.subject.fieldofresearch | Public health not elsewhere classified | |
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode | 420399 | |
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode | 420699 | |
dc.title | Assessing a temporary isolation room from an infection control perspective: A discussion paper | |
dc.type | Journal article | |
dc.type.description | C1 - Articles | |
dc.type.code | C - Journal Articles | |
dcterms.license | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ | |
dc.description.version | Version of Record (VoR) | |
gro.faculty | Griffith Health, School of Nursing and Midwifery | |
gro.rights.copyright | © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Australasian College for Infection Prevention and Control. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits unrestricted, non-commercial use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, providing that the work is properly cited. | |
gro.hasfulltext | Full Text | |
gro.griffith.author | Mitchell, Brett | |