Literature DB >> 22190557

Is alcohol-based hand disinfection equivalent to surgical scrub before placing a central venous catheter?

Thomas Michael Burch1, Brett Stanger, K Annette Mizuguchi, David Zurakowski, Sean D Reid.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Waterless antiseptic surgical hand scrub (1% chlorhexidine gluconate and 61% ethyl alcohol, Avagard™; 3M Health Care, St. Paul, MN), alcohol-only cleanser (62% ethyl alcohol), and traditional surgical scrub (5-minute scrub with 4% chlorhexidine soap using a sterile scrub brush with water) are techniques used for hand cleansing and disinfection. We hypothesized that alcohol-only cleanser and waterless antiseptic scrub (Avagard) would be as effective as a traditional surgical scrub for hand cleansing before placement of central venous catheters.
METHODS: Fingers of subjects were plate-cultured for 24 hours after 5 methods of hand cleansing: method 1: traditional surgical scrub (n = 49 plates produced by 14 subjects); method 2: traditional surgical scrub (5-minute scrub with water, brush, and 4% chlorhexidine soap) followed by a 15-minute break, then alcohol-only cleanser (62% alcohol) (n = 49 plates produced by 14 subjects); method 3: alcohol-only cleanser alone (n = 49 plates produced by 14 subjects); method 4: alcohol-only cleanser (62% alcohol), followed by a 15-minute break, then traditional surgical scrub (5-minute scrub with brush, and 4% chlorhexidine soap with water) (n = 49 plates produced by 14 subjects); and method 5: waterless surgical scrub (Avagard) alone (n = 116 plates produced by 38 subjects). The 15-minute break was introduced to allow a short period of recontamination, and to test for residual effects from prior cleansing.
RESULTS: Alcohol-only cleanser alone (method 3) was significantly less effective than the traditional surgical scrub (method 1) (P < 0.001; 82% plate growth). Waterless surgical scrub (Avagard) (method 5) had a 0% observed difference (95% confidence interval [CI]: -14% to 11%) compared with the traditional 5-minute scrub (method 1) (P = 0.99; 16% plate growth). When a traditional surgical scrub was used first followed by a 15-minute period of recontamination, there was a 6% observed difference in method 2 from reference (method 1) (95% CI: -10% to 22%), and 0% observed difference in method 4 from reference (95% CI: -15% to 15%).
CONCLUSION: As the initial cleansing method, the alcohol-only cleanser (method 3) was significantly less effective than the traditional surgical scrub (method 1) (P < 0.001).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22190557     DOI: 10.1213/ANE.0b013e31824083b8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anesth Analg        ISSN: 0003-2999            Impact factor:   5.108


  5 in total

1.  Comparison of Aqueous and Alcohol-based Agents for Presurgical Skin Preparation Methods in Mice.

Authors:  Jacquelyn M Del Valle; Elizabeth A Fisk; Erica L Noland; Daewoo Pak; Jingyi Zhang; Marcus J Crim; Frank R Lawrence; F Claire Hankenson
Journal:  J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci       Date:  2018-07-03       Impact factor: 1.232

2.  Using Waterless Alcohol-based Antiseptic for Skin Preparation and Active Thermal Support in Laboratory Rats.

Authors:  F Claire Hankenson; Joshua J Kim; Thien M Le; Frank R Lawrence; Jacquelyn M Del Valle
Journal:  J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci       Date:  2021-05-04       Impact factor: 1.232

3.  Comparison of an alcohol-based hand rub and water-based chlorhexidine gluconate scrub technique for hand antisepsis prior to elective surgery in horses.

Authors:  Eduardo Almeida da Silveira; Kirstin A Bubeck; Edisleidy Rodriguez Batista; Perrine Piat; Sheila Laverty; Guy Beauchamp; Marie Archambault; Yvonne Elce
Journal:  Can Vet J       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 1.008

4.  Chlorhexidine is not an essential component in alcohol-based surgical hand preparation: a comparative study of two handrubs based on a modified EN 12791 test protocol.

Authors:  Thomas-Jörg Hennig; Sebastian Werner; Kathrin Naujox; Andreas Arndt
Journal:  Antimicrob Resist Infect Control       Date:  2017-09-13       Impact factor: 4.887

Review 5.  Central Venous Catheters for Hemodialysis-the Myth and the Evidence.

Authors:  Mohammad Ahsan Sohail; Tushar J Vachharajani; Evamaria Anvari
Journal:  Kidney Int Rep       Date:  2021-10-11
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.