Comparison of waterless hand antisepsis agents at short application times: Raising the flag of concern

被引:51
作者
Dharan, S [1 ]
Hugonnet, S [1 ]
Sax, H [1 ]
Pittet, D [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Hosp Geneva, Dept Internal Med, Infect Control Program, CH-1211 Geneva 14, Switzerland
关键词
D O I
10.1086/502182
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
OBJECTIVE: Although alcohol-based hand rinses and gels have recommended application times of 30 to 60 seconds, healthcare workers usually take much less time for hand hygiene. We compared the efficacies of four alcohol-based hand rubs produced in Europe (hand rinses A, B, and C and one gel formulation) with the efficacy of the European Norm 1500 (EN 1500) reference waterless hand antisepsis agent (60% 2-propanol) at short application times. DESIGN: Comparative crossover study. SETTING: Infection Control Program laboratory of a large tertiary-care teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Twelve healthy volunteers. INTERVENTION: Measurement of residual bacterial counts and log reduction factors following inoculation of finger- tips with Staphylococcus aureus American Type Culture Collection (ATCC 6538, Pseudomonas aeruginosa ATCC 15442, and a clinical isolate of Enterococcus faecalis. I RESULTS: All hand rinses satisfied EN 1500 standards following a single application for 15 and 30 seconds, but reduction factors for the gel formulation were significantly lower for all tested organisms (all P < .025). CONCLUSIONS: Under stringent conditions similar to clinical practice, all three hand rinses proved to be more efficacious than the marketed alcohol-based gel in reducing bacterial counts on hands. Further studies are necessary to determine the in vivo efficacy of alcohol-based gels and whether they are as efficacious as alcohol-based rinses in reducing the transmission of nosocomial infections.
引用
收藏
页码:160 / 164
页数:5
相关论文
共 26 条
[1]  
*ASTM, 2000, ASTM E 117400 STAND
[2]   TEST FOR HYGIENIC HAND DISINFECTION [J].
AYLIFFE, GAJ ;
BABB, JR ;
QUORAISHI, AH .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PATHOLOGY, 1978, 31 (10) :923-928
[3]   Skin irritation and dryness associated with two hand-hygiene regimens: Soap-and-water hand washing versus hand antisepsis with an alcoholic hand gel [J].
Boyce, JM ;
Kelliher, S ;
Vallande, N .
INFECTION CONTROL AND HOSPITAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2000, 21 (07) :442-448
[4]   It is time for action: Improving hand hygiene in hospitals [J].
Boyce, JM .
ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 1999, 130 (02) :153-155
[5]   Antiseptic technology: Access, affordability, and acceptance [J].
Boyce, JM .
EMERGING INFECTIOUS DISEASES, 2001, 7 (02) :231-233
[6]  
*EUR COMM STAND, 1997, EN 1500 CHEM DIS ANT
[7]   Chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) activity against clinical isolates of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium (VREF) and the effects of moisturizing agents on CHG residue accumulation on the skin [J].
Frantz, SW ;
Haines, KA ;
Azar, CG ;
Ward, JI ;
Homan, SM ;
Roberts, RB .
JOURNAL OF HOSPITAL INFECTION, 1997, 37 (02) :157-164
[8]   Alcohol-based handrub improves compliance with hand hygiene in intensive care units [J].
Hugonnet, S ;
Perneger, TV ;
Pittet, D .
ARCHIVES OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2002, 162 (09) :1037-1043
[9]   Limited efficacy of alcohol-based hand gels [J].
Kramer, A ;
Rudolph, P ;
Kampf, G ;
Pittet, D .
LANCET, 2002, 359 (9316) :1489-1490
[10]   Skin hygiene and infection prevention: More of the same or different approaches? [J].
Larson, E .
CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES, 1999, 29 (05) :1287-1294