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.

In vivo comparative efficacy of three surgical hand preparation agents in reducing bacterial count / Barbadoro, Pamela; Martini, E; Savini, S; Pelaia, Paolo; Ponzio, E; Prospero, Emilia; D'Errico, Marcello Mario. - In: THE JOURNAL OF HOSPITAL INFECTION. - ISSN 0195-6701. - STAMPA. - 86:(2014), pp. 64-67.

In vivo comparative efficacy of three surgical hand preparation agents in reducing bacterial count.

BARBADORO, Pamela;PELAIA, Paolo;Ponzio E;PROSPERO, Emilia;D'ERRICO, Marcello Mario
2014-01-01

Abstract

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.
2014
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11566/134862
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 6
  • Scopus 13
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 8
social impact