Adherence Experimental Group

The results were interpreted and compared from each of the three groups at baseline, after one month of intervention, and at six months. At baseline, the control group had a 75% adherence rate to hand hygiene. The Positive Reinforcement group had a 60.8% adherence rate to hand hygiene procedure. The Risk of Nonadherence Experimental group had a 63.3% adherence rate. After one month of intervention, the Positive Reinforcement group had the greatest increase in adherence at 15.5%. Both the Risk of Nonadherence group and Control group had a decline in hand hygiene adherence at 6.4% and 3.2% respectively. After six months, only the Positive Reinforcement group had increased in adherence. The Risk of Nonadherence Experimental group and the Control group’s adherence rates decreased. The adherence rates were also looked at from month to month. Over the course of 6 months, there was not any significant differences between the groups rates and the hand hygiene adherence was not continued after the six-month experiment. The results also showed that …show more content…
There are tables that outline the rates of hand washing adherence that compared to different dates and groups. This experiment had demonstrated that with education and rewards, it does not necessarily mean that there would be adherence after the six-month period. The information that was presented in the study had pertained to the subject at hand. The results were able to portray and answer the question on hand with the help of the tables. The tables looked at the baseline, after six months, and the rate of infections. The mean and differences were found to help see if there was any significant improvement and this was able to answer their concern about hand hygiene adherence and infection rates. The background information pertained to the question that the article was asking. It provided a basis of knowledge for the reader and stated the importance of the