Adams D, Quayum M, Worthington T, Lambert P, Elliott T
Microbiology Research and Development Group, University Hospital Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Edgbaston, UK.
J Hosp Infect. 2005 Dec;61(4):287-90. doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2005.05.015. Epub 2005 Oct 10.
The efficacy of a new skin disinfectant, 2% (w/v) chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) in 70% (v/v) isopropyl alcohol (IPA) (ChloraPrep), was compared with five commonly used skin disinfectants against Staphylococcus epidermidis RP62A in the presence or absence of protein, utilizing quantitative time-kill suspension and carrier tests. All six disinfectants [70% (v/v) IPA, 0.5% (w/v) aqueous CHG, 2% (w/v) aqueous CHG, 0.5% (w/v) CHG in 70% (v/v) IPA and 10% (w/v) aqueous povidone iodine (PI)] achieved a log(10) reduction factor of 5, in colony-forming units/mL, in a suspension test (exposure time 30s) in the presence and absence of 10% human serum. Subsequent challenges of S. epidermidis RP62A in a biofilm (with and without human serum) demonstrated reduced bactericidal activity. Overall, the most effective skin disinfectants tested against S. epidermidis RP62A were 2% (w/v) CHG in 70% IPA and 10% (w/v) PI. These results suggest that enhanced skin antisepsis may be achieved with 2% (w/v) CHG in 70% (v/v) IPA compared with the three commonly used CHG preparations [0.5% (w/v) aqueous CHG, 2% (w/v) aqueous CHG and 0.5% (w/v) CHG in 70% (v/v) IPA].
在有或无蛋白质存在的情况下,使用定量时间杀灭悬液和载体试验,将一种新型皮肤消毒剂2%(w/v)葡萄糖酸氯己定(CHG)溶于70%(v/v)异丙醇(IPA)(氯普瑞)的杀菌效果与五种常用皮肤消毒剂针对表皮葡萄球菌RP62A的杀菌效果进行了比较。所有六种消毒剂[70%(v/v)IPA、0.5%(w/v)CHG水溶液、2%(w/v)CHG水溶液及0.5%(w/v)CHG溶于70%(v/v)IPA以及10%(w/v)聚维酮碘(PI)水溶液]在有和无10%人血清存在的悬液试验(暴露时间30秒)中,均实现了每毫升菌落形成单位对数(10)减少5个单位。随后在生物膜中(有和无人血清)对表皮葡萄球菌RP62A进行的挑战试验表明杀菌活性降低。总体而言,针对表皮葡萄球菌RP62A测试的最有效的皮肤消毒剂是70% IPA中的2%(w/v)CHG和10%(w/v)PI。这些结果表明,与三种常用的CHG制剂[0.5%(w/v)CHG水溶液、2%(w/v)CHG水溶液及0.5%(w/v)CHG溶于70%(v/v)IPA]相比,70%(v/v)IPA中的2%(w/v)CHG可能实现更强的皮肤防腐效果。