Suppr超能文献

手术手消毒后的洗手及干燥时间是否会影响基于丙醇的手消毒剂的效果?

Does a preceding hand wash and drying time after surgical hand disinfection influence the efficacy of a propanol-based hand rub?

作者信息

Hübner Nils-Olaf, Kampf Günter, Kamp Philipp, Kohlmann Thomas, Kramer Axel

机构信息

Institute of Hygiene and Environmental Medicine, Ernst Moritz Arndt University, Walther-Rathenau-Str, 49a, 17489 Greifswald, Germany.

出版信息

BMC Microbiol. 2006 Jun 22;6:57. doi: 10.1186/1471-2180-6-57.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Recently, a propanol-based hand rub has been described to exceed the efficacy requirements of the European standard EN 12791 in only 1.5 min significantly. But the effect of a 1 min preceding hand wash and the effect of one additional minute for evaporation of the alcohol after its application on the efficacy after a 1.5 min application time has never been studied.

METHODS

We have investigated a propanol-based hand rub (Sterillium, based on 45% propan-2-ol, 30% propan-1-ol and 0.2% mecetronium etilsulfate) in three variations: with (A) and without (B) a 1 min hand wash before the disinfection of 1.5 min with immediate sampling after the disinfection; and (C) without a hand wash before the disinfection but with sampling 1 min after the disinfection. The efficacy of the three variations was compared to the reference treatment of EN 12791. All experiments were performed in a Latin-square design with 20 volunteers. Pre- and post-values (immediate and after 3 hr) were obtained according to EN 12791.

RESULTS

The 3 min reference disinfection reduced resident hand bacteria on average by 1.8 log10 steps (immediate effect) and 1.4 log10-steps (sustained effect) respectively. Method A was equally effective as the reference (immediate efficacy: 1.5 log10-steps; sustained efficacy: 1.6 log10-steps). Method B seemed to be more effective (immediate efficacy: 2.3 log10-steps; sustained efficacy: 1.7 log10-steps). Method C revealed the best efficacy (immediate efficacy: 2.3 log10-steps; sustained efficacy: 2.0 log10-steps). A comparison of all three treatment variations and the reference treatment revealed a significant difference for the immediate efficacy (p = 0.026; Friedman test), but not for the sustained efficacy (p = 0.430). A post-hoc-test for the immediate efficacy indicated a significant difference between methods A and C (p < 0.05; Wilcoxon-Wilcox test). Hence, none of the treatment variations was significantly less effective than the reference treatment.

CONCLUSION

An application of the propanol-based hand rub for 1.5 min after 1 min hand wash fulfills the efficacy requirements of EN 12791. The efficacy can be improved to some extent by omitting the preceding hand wash and by awaiting the evaporation of the alcohol which is clinical practice anyway. The preceding hand wash has the most negative effect on the immediate effect. Based on our data hands should not be routinely washed before the disinfection period unless there is a good reason for it such as visible soiling.

摘要

背景

最近,有一种基于丙醇的手部擦剂被描述为仅在1.5分钟内就能显著超过欧洲标准EN 12791的功效要求。但是,在1.5分钟的应用时间之前进行1分钟的洗手以及在应用酒精后再额外等待1分钟使其蒸发对功效的影响从未被研究过。

方法

我们研究了一种基于丙醇的手部擦剂(施德力,含45%的丙-2-醇、30%的丙-1-醇和0.2%的乙硫酸美西铵)的三种变体:变体A,在进行1.5分钟消毒前进行1分钟洗手,并在消毒后立即采样;变体B,在进行1.5分钟消毒前不洗手,并在消毒后立即采样;变体C,在进行消毒前不洗手,但在消毒1分钟后采样。将这三种变体的功效与EN 12791的参考处理方法进行比较。所有实验均采用拉丁方设计,有20名志愿者参与。根据EN 12791获取洗手前后(即时和3小时后)的数据。

结果

3分钟的参考消毒平均使手部常驻细菌分别减少1.8个对数10级(即时效果)和1.4个对数10级(持续效果)。方法A与参考方法效果相同(即时功效:1.5个对数10级;持续功效:1.6个对数10级)。方法B似乎更有效(即时功效:2.3个对数10级;持续功效:1.7个对数10级)。方法C显示出最佳功效(即时功效:2.3个对数10级;持续功效:2.0个对数10级)。对所有三种处理变体和参考处理方法的比较显示,即时功效存在显著差异(p = 0.026;弗里德曼检验),但持续功效无显著差异(p = 0.430)。即时功效的事后检验表明方法A和C之间存在显著差异(p < 0.05;威尔科克森-威尔科克斯检验)。因此,没有一种处理变体的效果明显低于参考处理方法。

结论

在洗手1分钟后应用基于丙醇的手部擦剂1.5分钟可满足EN 12791的功效要求。在临床实践中无论如何都会等待酒精蒸发,省略之前的洗手步骤可在一定程度上提高功效。之前的洗手步骤对即时效果有最负面的影响。根据我们的数据,除非有充分理由,如明显污染,否则在消毒前不应常规洗手。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验