An interventional study of Glo Germ-Based Visual Feedback Training and Conventional Surgical Hand Antisepsis Training in Surgical Hand Antisepsis, sponsored by Zonguldak Bulent Ecevit University. Completed at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye). Open to participants aged 18 Years and older, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-11-05.
Sponsored by Zonguldak Bulent Ecevit University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Other
Help build ClinicalTrials.gg — short surveys, remote interviews or testing, in your language. Take part →
This randomized controlled study evaluated the effect of Glo Germ-based visual feedback on surgical hand antisepsis performance among undergraduate nursing students.
A total of 46 third-year nursing students enrolled in an Operating Room Nursing course were randomly assigned to an intervention group (n=23) or a control group (n=23). Both groups received theoretical instruction and conventional practical training in surgical hand antisepsis. In addition, the intervention group received individualized visual feedback using Glo Germ fluorescent training lotion and ultraviolet light to identify areas requiring improvement in hand antisepsis technique.
The primary outcome was surgical hand antisepsis skill performance. Secondary outcomes included knowledge of surgical hand antisepsis and anatomical hand cleanliness. Outcomes were evaluated at the designated assessment points, including a one-month follow-up.
The study aimed to determine whether incorporating fluorescence-based visual feedback into conventional training improves surgical hand antisepsis education among nursing students.
Surgical hand antisepsis is an essential component of infection prevention in perioperative settings. Effective surgical hand antisepsis requires both theoretical knowledge and the correct application of antisepsis procedures, including adequate coverage of anatomical hand and forearm surfaces. Traditional educational methods may not provide sufficient visual information to help students recognize areas missed during hand antisepsis.
This study was designed as a prospective, parallel-group randomized controlled educational trial to evaluate the effectiveness of Glo Germ-based visual feedback in surgical hand antisepsis training among undergraduate nursing students.
The study included 46 third-year nursing students enrolled in an Operating Room Nursing course at a university in Zonguldak, Türkiye. Participants were randomly allocated to an intervention group (n=23) or a control group (n=23) using a computer-generated randomization sequence. Allocation concealment was implemented using sequentially numbered, opaque, sealed envelopes.
Both groups received a 45-minute theoretical educational session and conventional practical instruction on surgical hand antisepsis. Students in the control group received conventional verbal feedback during practical training.
In addition to conventional training, students in the intervention group received Glo Germ-based visual feedback. A fluorescent training lotion and ultraviolet light were used to visualize anatomical areas requiring improvement. Participants received individualized feedback and repeated the hand antisepsis procedure to reinforce correct technique.
The primary outcome was surgical hand antisepsis skill performance, assessed using an 18-item observational checklist. Secondary outcomes included surgical hand antisepsis knowledge, assessed using a 15-item knowledge assessment form, and anatomical hand cleanliness, evaluated through fluorescence-based visual assessment.
Knowledge was assessed at baseline, immediately after training, and at the one-month follow-up. Skill performance was assessed immediately after training and at the one-month follow-up. Fluorescence-based anatomical cleanliness assessment was conducted at the assessment points specified in the study protocol.
Outcome assessments were performed by independent assessors who were blinded to group allocation. The study investigated whether adding individualized fluorescence-based visual feedback to conventional surgical hand antisepsis education improves students' knowledge, practical skills, and anatomical cleanliness.
Zonguldak Bulent Ecevit University is the lead sponsor of 100 studies on the registry; 8 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Being a third-year undergraduate nursing student enrolled in the Operating Room Nursing course.
Voluntarily agreeing to participate in the study. Providing written .
Exclusion Criteria:
Having open wounds, cuts, or skin lesions on the hands that could interfere with surgical hand antisepsis procedures.
Having hand eczema or other dermatological conditions affecting the hands that could interfere with training or assessment.
Declining to participate in the study.
Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.
You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.
Informed consent
Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.
You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Participants received a 45-minute theoretical session and conventional practical training on surgical hand antisepsis. In addition, they received individualized visual feedback using Glo Germ fluorescent training lotion and ultraviolet light to identify areas requiring improvement in hand antisepsis technique. Participants repeated the procedure following visual feedback.
Other: Glo Germ-Based Visual Feedback Training
Participants received a 45-minute theoretical session and conventional practical training on surgical hand antisepsis. Conventional verbal feedback was provided during practical training. Participants did not receive Glo Germ-based visual feedback.
Other: Conventional Surgical Hand Antisepsis Training
An educational intervention incorporating Glo Germ fluorescent training lotion and ultraviolet light to provide individualized visual feedback during surgical hand antisepsis training. The intervention enabled participants to identify anatomical areas requiring improvement and repeat the antisepsis procedure following feedback.
Participants received a 45-minute theoretical educational session covering the principles, importance, and correct procedures of surgical hand antisepsis. This was followed by conventional practical training, including demonstration and supervised practice of surgical hand antisepsis techniques. Verbal feedback was provided to support correct technique and improve participants' practical skills. This standard educational intervention was provided to both the experimental and control groups.
Surgical Hand Antisepsis Skill Performance
Surgical hand antisepsis skill performance was assessed using an 18-item observational checklist evaluating the correct execution of surgical hand antisepsis procedures. Each correctly performed step was scored as 1, and each incorrectly performed or omitted step was scored as 0. Total scores ranged from 0 to 18, with higher scores indicating better surgical hand antisepsis performance. Assessments were conducted immediately after training and at the one-month follow-up.
Time frame: Immediately after training and at 1-month follow-up
Surgical Hand Antisepsis Knowledge
Knowledge of surgical hand antisepsis was assessed using a 15-item knowledge assessment form. Total scores ranged from 0 to 15, with higher scores indicating greater knowledge of surgical hand antisepsis. Knowledge was assessed at baseline, immediately after training, and at the one-month follow-up.
Time frame: Baseline, immediately after training, and at 1-month follow-up
Percentage of Anatomical Hand Cleanliness
Anatomical hand cleanliness was assessed using Glo Germ fluorescent training lotion and ultraviolet light. The anatomical regions of the hands and forearms were examined to identify areas with inadequate coverage during surgical hand antisepsis training. The assessment results were calculated and expressed as percentages. Higher percentages indicated better anatomical hand cleanliness. Assessments were performed immediately after training in the intervention group and at the one-month follow-up in both groups.
Time frame: Immediately after training (intervention group only) and at 1-month follow-up (both groups)
Plan to share: No — Individual participant data will not be made publicly available. The study data will be maintained confidentially and used in accordance with the approved research protocol, institutional policies, and applicable data protection regulations.
Ran from Nov 2024 to primary completion in Dec 2024, 1 month.
How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.
From the registry record's own update history. This site started tracking changes on Sep 25, 2026; for anything earlier, see the record history on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
This study is completed, as verified in Oct 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Zonguldak Bulent Ecevit University →