Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 23, 2026

Solution Blow Spinning of Polymeric Nano-Composite Fibers for Personal Protective Equipment
Published on: March 18, 2021
Effectiveness of a multisite personal protective equipment (PPE)-free zone intervention in acute care
Lindsay D Visnovsky1, Yue Zhang1, Molly K Leecaster1
1Division of Epidemiology, Department of Internal Medicine,University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City,Utah.
Objective:
Determine the effectiveness of a personal protective equipment (PPE)-free zone intervention on healthcare personnel (HCP) entry hand hygiene (HH) and PPE donning compliance in rooms of patients in contact precautions.
Design:
Quasi-experimental, multicenter intervention, before-and-after study with concurrent controls.
Setting:
All patient rooms on contact precautions on 16 units (5 medical-surgical, 6 intensive care, 5 specialty care units) at 3 acute-care facilities (2 academic medical centers, 1 Veterans Affairs hospital). Observations of PPE donning and entry HH compliance by HCP were conducted during both study phases. Surveys of HCP perceptions of the PPE-free zone were distributed in both study phases.
Intervention:
A PPE-free zone, where a low-risk area inside door thresholds of contact precautions rooms was demarcated by red tape on the floor. Inside this area, HCP were not required to wear PPE.
Results:
We observed 3,970 room entries. HH compliance did not change between study phases among intervention units (relative risk [RR], 0.92; P = .29) and declined in control units (RR, 0.70; P = .005); however, the PPE-free zone did not significantly affect compliance (P = .07). The PPE-free zone effect on HH was significant only for rooms on enteric precautions (P = .008). PPE use was not significantly different before versus after the intervention (P = .15). HCP perceived the zone positively; 65% agreed that it facilitated communication and 66.8% agreed that it permitted checking on patients more frequently.
Conclusions:
HCP viewed the PPE-free zone favorably and it did not adversely affect PPE or HH compliance. Future infection prevention interventions should consider the complex sociotechnical system factors influencing behavior change.
More Related Videos
09:38Determining Immune System Suppression versus CNS Protection for Pharmacological Interventions in Autoimmune Demyelination
Published on: September 12, 2016
08:22The Application of Point-of-Care Ultrasonography (POCUS) in the Management of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) in the Intensive Care Unit
Published on: December 12, 2025
Related Concept Videos
Personal Protective Equipment
Zones of Protection
Protective zones are defined by closed dashed lines, containing one or more components. A key characteristic of these zones is the strategic placement of...
Hybrid Zones
Acute Kidney Injury V: Interprofessional Care
Acute Coronary Syndrome IV: Interprofessional Care
Leveling Equipment