P Barbadoro1, E Martini2, S Savini2, A Marigliano3, E Ponzio3, E Prospero4, M M D'Errico1. 1. Hospital Hygiene Service, Ospedali Riuniti, Ancona, Italy; Department of Biomedical Sciences and Public Health, Unit of Hygiene, Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Ancona, Italy. 2. Hospital Hygiene Service, Ospedali Riuniti, Ancona, Italy. 3. Department of Biomedical Sciences and Public Health, Unit of Hygiene, Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Ancona, Italy. 4. Hospital Hygiene Service, Ospedali Riuniti, Ancona, Italy; Department of Biomedical Sciences and Public Health, Unit of Hygiene, Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Ancona, Italy. Electronic address: e.prospero@univpm.it.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Besides objective efficacy, the choice between an antiseptic-based liquid soap, or an alcohol-based hand rub for surgical hand preparation technique is based on personal preference. Glycerol is often added to the formulations in order to enhance tolerability; however, it has been recently reported as a factor reducing the sustained effect of surgical hand rubs. AIM: To compare the efficacies of three commercial products for hand decontamination. METHODS: The in vivo efficacy of an alcohol-based hand rub (isopropyl alcohol 40%; N-propyl alcohol 25%; glycerin 1.74%; triethanolamine salt of carbomer <1%) was compared with other widely used products in surgical hand antisepsis (chlorhexidine and povidone-iodine). All products were used according to the manufacturers' instructions. FINDINGS: The best results were achieved with the alcohol-based hand rub and these were sustained for a period of 3h. Some volunteers experienced skin peeling off the hands when using alcohol-based hand rub; in this group of participants, the bacterial count was reduced only by 0.91 ± 1.67 log10 compared with 2.86 ± 1.22 log10 in the group who did not show this phenomenon. CONCLUSION: Besides confirming the importance of alcohol-based hand rubs for surgical hand decontamination, the results suggest the value of assessing the characteristics, and response of healthcare workers' skin, that may contribute to the development of skin peeling, and the subsequent possibility of a paradoxical overcolonization of hands after surgical preparation with alcohol-based hand rub.
BACKGROUND: Besides objective efficacy, the choice between an antiseptic-based liquid soap, or an alcohol-based hand rub for surgical hand preparation technique is based on personal preference. Glycerol is often added to the formulations in order to enhance tolerability; however, it has been recently reported as a factor reducing the sustained effect of surgical hand rubs. AIM: To compare the efficacies of three commercial products for hand decontamination. METHODS: The in vivo efficacy of an alcohol-based hand rub (isopropyl alcohol 40%; N-propyl alcohol 25%; glycerin 1.74%; triethanolamine salt of carbomer <1%) was compared with other widely used products in surgical hand antisepsis (chlorhexidine and povidone-iodine). All products were used according to the manufacturers' instructions. FINDINGS: The best results were achieved with the alcohol-based hand rub and these were sustained for a period of 3h. Some volunteers experienced skin peeling off the hands when using alcohol-based hand rub; in this group of participants, the bacterial count was reduced only by 0.91 ± 1.67 log10 compared with 2.86 ± 1.22 log10 in the group who did not show this phenomenon. CONCLUSION: Besides confirming the importance of alcohol-based hand rubs for surgical hand decontamination, the results suggest the value of assessing the characteristics, and response of healthcare workers' skin, that may contribute to the development of skin peeling, and the subsequent possibility of a paradoxical overcolonization of hands after surgical preparation with alcohol-based hand rub.
Authors: Rosa M Lopez-Gigosos; Alberto Mariscal; Eloisa Mariscal-Lopez; Mario Gutierrez-Bedmar; Joaquin Fernandez Journal: Appl Environ Microbiol Date: 2015-08-14 Impact factor: 4.792
Authors: Ricardo Becerro de Bengoa Vallejo; David Sevillano Fernandez; Luis Alou Cervera; Laura Martín Aragón; Marta Elena Losa Iglesias; Luis Rodolfo Collado Yurrita; Daniel Lopez Lopez Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) Date: 2018-10 Impact factor: 1.817
Authors: Gilberto G Gaspar; Mayra G Menegueti; Ana Elisa R Lopes; Roberto O C Santos; Thamiris R de Araújo; Aline Nassiff; Lécio R Ferreira; Maria Eulalia L V Dallora; Silvia R M S Canini; Fernando Bellissimo-Rodrigues Journal: Antimicrob Resist Infect Control Date: 2018-07-09 Impact factor: 4.887