Published in PLOS One on 2026-06-11, this study is presented as an attributed evidence briefing. The excerpts below are the original researchers’ words, reproduced under their Creative Commons Attribution licence. Health Signal has selected the abstract and, where needed, opening background paragraphs; the complete methods, results, limitations and references remain in the linked paper.
Original study title: Compliance with infection prevention and control practices and associated factors among healthcare workers in Tanzania: Experience from a secondary level-referral hospital
Original authors: Cesilia Charles, Lutengano Mkonongo, David Masanja, Pendo Edward, Damian Maruba, Philipo Felix Mwita, Baraka Nkondo, Frank Elisha, Edward Bucheye, Abel Nyika, Avent Kalumiana, Emmanuel Amsi, Elly Ambikile, Nathanael Sirili, Joshua Mollel, Bernard Njau, Radenta Bahegwa, Deogratias Banuba
Source: PLOS One • DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0337254
Read the complete primary study ↗ · Creative Commons Attribution licence
From the researchers
Abstract
Compliance with Infection Prevention and Control practices remains a key challenge, affecting the safety of both patients and healthcare workers. Poor compliance raises the risk of Hospital-Acquired Infections (HAIs) and antimicrobial resistance (AMR).
This study aimed to assess compliance levels and factors associated with infection prevention and control practices among HCWs at Katavi Referral Regional Hospital (KRRH) in Tanzania.
A hospital-based cross-sectional study was conducted among 195 healthcare workers from July 24 to August 23, 2025. Questionnaires and observation checklists were used to collect sociodemographic data, compliance levels, individual-level factors, hospital-level factors, and the availability of IPC supplies. A validated Compliance with Standard Precautions Scale (CSPS) tool, developed by the WHO, was used to measure compliance levels. Data were analysed in STATA (version 15.0), using bivariate and multivariate modified Poisson regression models. Adjusted Prevalence Ratio (APR) with 95% Confidence Interval (CI) was used to assess factors associated with IPC compliance.
The study revealed that the overall compliance with IPC practices among healthcare workers was 68.9%. Only 39.0% of HCWs demonstrated high overall compliance with IPC practices (<80%), while 61% had low overall compliance (>80%). Also, factors significantly associated with compliance with IPC practices were doctor profession (APR: 0.32;95% CI:0.19,0.57), blood/body fluid exposure (APR: 1.55;95% CI:1.095,2.19), motivation at workplace (APR: 1.43;95% CI:1.02,2.02), supportive supervision (APR: 1.92;95% CI:1.09,3.38), and presence of IPC committee (APR: 1.61;95% CI:1.07,2.40). The most common available IPC supplies were hand hygiene items, personal protective equipment, and waste management items (100%). However, some IPC supplies were unavailable, including water (44.4%) and soap (55.6%) in latrines.
Overall compliance with IPC practices among HCWs remained suboptimal. Improving compliance requires strengthening IPC governance through functional IPC committees, enhancing supportive supervision and motivation, and addressing persistent infrastructural and resource gaps within health facilities.
Introduction
Hospital-acquired infection (HAI) is the most common adverse event in healthcare delivery systems globally, threatening the health of patients and healthcare workers. In 2024, the WHO global report highlighted that HAIs kill seven patients per 100 in high-income countries and 15 patients per 100 in lower- and middle-income countries (LMICs) annually [1]. In Sub-Saharan African countries, the HAI rate is 12.9%, of which the highest burden (19.7%) has been observed in East Africa [2–6]. In Tanzania, the rate of HAI is 14.8% higher than in the developed world [7]. The main cause for the high HAI rate is non-compliance with IPC practices among HCWs [8]. Additionally, the lack of an IPC committee, IPC training, and IPC policies/guidelines impedes their compliance [9–11].
Reading this evidence
Use the full paper to check the study design, participant selection, comparator and outcome definitions before drawing a practical conclusion. An association does not by itself show cause and effect. A reported performance measure needs its denominator and uncertainty. A finding from a particular facility, sample or time period should retain that scope when it is discussed elsewhere.
This briefing makes the source accessible within the wider hospital systems desk. It does not assess an individual patient or certify a product. When considering relevance to another health system, examine the original authors’ account of context and limitations, then seek local implementation evidence. The related reporting below provides other studies to read alongside this one; it is a topic connection, rather than a claim that their results are directly comparable.
© 2026 Cesilia Charles, Lutengano Mkonongo, David Masanja, Pendo Edward, Damian Maruba, Philipo Felix Mwita, Baraka Nkondo, Frank Elisha, Edward Bucheye, Abel Nyika, Avent Kalumiana, Emmanuel Amsi, Elly Ambikile, Nathanael Sirili, Joshua Mollel, Bernard Njau, Radenta Bahegwa, Deogratias Banuba. Excerpts reproduced under CC BY. Selection, formatting and contextual notes by Health Signal. The researchers are the authors of the source study, not members of Health Signal’s staff.
Explore connected evidence
- Evidence brief: Patterns of inpatient antibiotic use and antimicrobial resistance in the surgical wards of a Ugandan tertiary hospital: A mixed methods study
- Evidence brief: Contamination of Hospital Inanimate Surfaces with Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Extended-Spectrum Beta-Lactamase producing bacteria at Ocean Road Cancer Institute, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
- Evidence brief: Prevalence, outcomes, and predictors of mortality among adult intensive care unit patients with sepsis at a Tertiary Hospital in Tanzania: A prospective cohort study
