Kampf Günter, Kramer Axel
Bode Chemie GmbH & Co., Scientific Affairs, Melanchthonstrasse 27, 22525 Hamburg, Germany.
Clin Microbiol Rev. 2004 Oct;17(4):863-93, table of contents. doi: 10.1128/CMR.17.4.863-893.2004.
The etiology of nosocomial infections, the frequency of contaminated hands with the different nosocomial pathogens, and the role of health care workers' hands during outbreaks suggest that a hand hygiene preparation should at least have activity against bacteria, yeasts, and coated viruses. The importance of efficacy in choosing the right hand hygiene product is reflected in the new Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guideline on hand hygiene (J. M. Boyce and D. Pittet, Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep. 51:1-45, 2002). The best antimicrobial efficacy can be achieved with ethanol (60 to 85%), isopropanol (60 to 80%), and n-propanol (60 to 80%). The activity is broad and immediate. Ethanol at high concentrations (e.g., 95%) is the most effective treatment against naked viruses, whereas n-propanol seems to be more effective against the resident bacterial flora. The combination of alcohols may have a synergistic effect. The antimicrobial efficacy of chlorhexidine (2 to 4%) and triclosan (1 to 2%) is both lower and slower. Additionally, both agents have a risk of bacterial resistance, which is higher for chlorhexidine than triclosan. Their activity is often supported by the mechanical removal of pathogens during hand washing. Taking the antimicrobial efficacy and the mechanical removal together, they are still less effective than the alcohols. Plain soap and water has the lowest efficacy of all. In the new Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guideline, promotion of alcohol-based hand rubs containing various emollients instead of irritating soaps and detergents is one strategy to reduce skin damage, dryness, and irritation. Irritant contact dermatitis is highest with preparations containing 4% chlorhexidine gluconate, less frequent with nonantimicrobial soaps and preparations containing lower concentrations of chlorhexidine gluconate, and lowest with well-formulated alcohol-based hand rubs containing emollients and other skin conditioners. Too few published data from comparative trials are available to reliably rank triclosan. Personnel should be reminded that it is neither necessary nor recommended to routinely wash hands after each application of an alcohol-based hand rub. Long-lasting improvement of compliance with hand hygiene protocols can be successful if an effective and accessible alcohol-based hand rub with a proven dermal tolerance and an excellent user acceptability is supplied, accompanied by education of health care workers and promotion of the use of the product.
医院感染的病因、不同医院病原体污染手部的频率以及医护人员手部在疫情爆发中的作用表明,手部卫生制剂至少应具备针对细菌、酵母菌和包膜病毒的活性。选择合适的手部卫生产品时,功效的重要性在疾病控制与预防中心新的手部卫生指南中有体现(J.M.博伊斯和D.皮特泰,《发病率与死亡率周报》51:1 - 45,2002年)。乙醇(60%至85%)、异丙醇(60%至80%)和正丙醇(60%至80%)能实现最佳抗菌效果。其活性广泛且迅速。高浓度乙醇(如95%)是对抗裸露病毒最有效的处理方法,而正丙醇似乎对常驻细菌菌群更有效。醇类组合可能具有协同作用。洗必泰(2%至4%)和三氯生(1%至2%)的抗菌效果更低且起效更慢。此外,这两种制剂都有细菌耐药的风险,洗必泰的风险高于三氯生。它们的活性通常通过洗手过程中对手病原体的机械清除来辅助。综合抗菌效果和机械清除作用来看,它们仍不如醇类有效。普通肥皂和水的功效在所有产品中最低。在疾病控制与预防中心的新指南中,推广含有各种润肤剂的酒精类洗手液以替代刺激性肥皂和洗涤剂,是减少皮肤损伤、干燥和刺激的一种策略。含4%葡萄糖酸氯己定的制剂引发刺激性接触性皮炎的几率最高,不含抗菌剂的肥皂和含较低浓度葡萄糖酸氯己定的制剂引发的几率较低,而配方良好的含润肤剂和其他皮肤调理剂的酒精类洗手液引发的几率最低。关于三氯生的比较试验公开数据太少,无法可靠地对其进行排名。应提醒工作人员,每次使用酒精类洗手液后常规洗手既无必要也不被推荐。如果提供一种有效且易于获取、经证实具有皮肤耐受性且用户接受度高的酒精类洗手液,并对医护人员进行教育及推广该产品的使用,那么长期提高手部卫生规范的依从性就能取得成功。