• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

醇类和醇基手部消毒剂对肠道病毒 71 型的杀灭效果。

Efficacy of alcohols and alcohol-based hand disinfectants against human enterovirus 71.

机构信息

Research Center for Emerging Viral Infections, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan.

出版信息

J Hosp Infect. 2013 Apr;83(4):288-93. doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2012.12.010. Epub 2013 Feb 8.

DOI:10.1016/j.jhin.2012.12.010
PMID:23399482
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Human enterovirus 71 (HEV71) infections are a significant public health threat in the Asia-Pacific region and occasionally cause severe neurological complications and even death in children. Although good hand hygiene is important for controlling infection, relevant data regarding the efficacy of widely used hand disinfectants against HEV71 are still lacking.

AIM

To investigate the virucidal activity of alcohols and alcohol-based hand disinfectants against HEV71.

METHODS

A common alcohol-based hand disinfectant (0.5% chlorhexidine gluconate + 70% isopropanol) as well as different concentrations of isopropanol and ethanol were tested for virucidal activity against HEV71 using the suspension and the fingerpad tests.

FINDINGS

In suspension tests, 85% and 95% ethanol achieved a mean log10 reduction factor in HEV71 titre of >3 and nearly 6, respectively, within 10 min. By contrast, 70% and 75% ethanol and any concentration of isopropanol (70-95%) produced a factor of <1 in this test after the same exposure time. In fingerpad tests, only 95% ethanol showed a mean log10 reduction factor of >4, while both 75% ethanol and a chlorhexidine gluconate-containing formula were ineffective against HEV71 with a mean log10 reduction factor of <1 after a 30 s exposure time.

CONCLUSIONS

Widely used alcohol-based hand disinfectants based on 70% ethanol or isopropanol have poor effectiveness against HEV71. Ninety-five percent ethanol is the most effective concentration, but still cannot fully inactivate HEV71 and may be impractical for use in many instances. Hand hygiene with alcohol-based hand disinfectants alone is not recommended for preventing HEV71 transmission.

摘要

背景

人类肠道病毒 71 型(HEV71)感染是亚太地区的重大公共卫生威胁,偶尔会导致儿童出现严重的神经并发症,甚至死亡。尽管良好的手部卫生对控制感染很重要,但关于广泛使用的手部消毒剂对 HEV71 的功效的数据仍然缺乏。

目的

研究醇类和醇基手部消毒剂对 HEV71 的病毒杀灭活性。

方法

使用悬浮试验和指印试验,对一种常用的醇基手部消毒剂(0.5%葡萄糖酸氯己定+70%异丙醇)以及不同浓度的异丙醇和乙醇进行了杀灭 HEV71 的病毒活性测试。

发现

在悬浮试验中,85%和 95%乙醇在 10 分钟内使 HEV71 滴度的平均对数 10 减少因子分别>3 和近 6。相比之下,70%和 75%乙醇和任何浓度的异丙醇(70-95%)在相同暴露时间后产生的试验因子<1。在指印试验中,只有 95%乙醇显示出平均对数 10 减少因子>4,而 75%乙醇和含葡萄糖酸氯己定的配方在 30 秒暴露时间后对 HEV71 的平均对数 10 减少因子<1,均无效。

结论

基于 70%乙醇或异丙醇的广泛使用的醇基手部消毒剂对 HEV71 的效果不佳。95%乙醇是最有效的浓度,但仍不能完全灭活 HEV71,在许多情况下可能不切实际。单独使用醇基手部消毒剂进行手部卫生不能预防 HEV71 的传播。

相似文献

1
Efficacy of alcohols and alcohol-based hand disinfectants against human enterovirus 71.醇类和醇基手部消毒剂对肠道病毒 71 型的杀灭效果。
J Hosp Infect. 2013 Apr;83(4):288-93. doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2012.12.010. Epub 2013 Feb 8.
2
Comparative efficacy of ethanol and isopropanol against feline calicivirus, a norovirus surrogate.乙醇和异丙醇对猫杯状病毒(一种诺如病毒替代物)的比较疗效
Am J Infect Control. 2006 Feb;34(1):31-5. doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2005.05.012.
3
Investigation of the efficacy of alcohol-based solutions on adenovirus serotypes 8, 19 and 37, common causes of epidemic keratoconjunctivitis, after an adenovirus outbreak in hospital.研究在医院发生腺病毒暴发后,含酒精溶液对腺病毒 8、19 和 37 型(引起流行性角膜结膜炎的常见病因)的疗效。
J Hosp Infect. 2018 Nov;100(3):e30-e36. doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2018.05.011. Epub 2018 May 21.
4
Evaluation of a 2% chlorhexidine gluconate in 70% isopropyl alcohol skin disinfectant.对含2%葡萄糖酸氯己定的70%异丙醇皮肤消毒剂的评估。
J Hosp Infect. 2005 Dec;61(4):287-90. doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2005.05.015. Epub 2005 Oct 10.
5
Efficacy of soap and water and alcohol-based hand-rub preparations against live H1N1 influenza virus on the hands of human volunteers.肥皂水洗手法和酒精类擦手剂对人类志愿者手上活H1N1流感病毒的效果。
Clin Infect Dis. 2009 Feb 1;48(3):285-91. doi: 10.1086/595845.
6
Virucidal activity of Virkon S on human enterovirus.卫可V对人肠道病毒的杀病毒活性。
Med J Malaysia. 2005 Jun;60(2):246-8.
7
Reducing viral contamination from finger pads: handwashing is more effective than alcohol-based hand disinfectants.减少指垫上的病毒污染:洗手比含酒精的手部消毒剂更有效。
J Hosp Infect. 2015 Jul;90(3):226-34. doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2015.02.019. Epub 2015 Apr 10.
8
Comparison of virucidal activity of alcohol-based hand sanitizers versus antimicrobial hand soaps in vitro and in vivo.体外和体内比较基于酒精的手部消毒剂与抗菌性手部肥皂的杀病毒活性。
J Hosp Infect. 2012 Dec;82(4):277-80. doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2012.08.005. Epub 2012 Sep 23.
9
Disinfectant effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses present on human skin: model-based evaluation.皮肤表面存活的 SARS-CoV-2 和流感病毒对消毒剂的杀灭效果:基于模型的评估。
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2021 Jul;27(7):1042.e1-1042.e4. doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2021.04.009. Epub 2021 Apr 24.
10
Insufficient neutralization in testing a chlorhexidine-containing ethanol-based hand rub can result in a false positive efficacy assessment.在检测含氯己定的乙醇基洗手液时中和不足可能导致假阳性的功效评估。
BMC Infect Dis. 2005 Jun 20;5:48. doi: 10.1186/1471-2334-5-48.

引用本文的文献

1
Sensitivity Evaluation of Enveloped and Non-enveloped Viruses to Ethanol Using Machine Learning: A Systematic Review.使用机器学习评估包膜和非包膜病毒对乙醇的敏感性:系统评价。
Food Environ Virol. 2024 Mar;16(1):1-13. doi: 10.1007/s12560-023-09571-2. Epub 2023 Dec 5.
2
Investigating the Efficacy of Various Handwashing Methods against Enveloped and Non-Enveloped Viruses.研究各种洗手方法对包膜和非包膜病毒的效果。
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2023 Feb 13;108(4):820-828. doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.22-0287. Print 2023 Apr 5.
3
Enteroviral Infections in Infants.
婴儿肠道病毒感染
Newborn (Clarksville). 2022 Jul-Sep;1(3):297-305. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-11002-0036. Epub 2022 Jul 10.
4
The epidemiological risk factors of hand, foot, mouth disease among children in Singapore: A retrospective case-control study.新加坡儿童手足口病的流行病学危险因素:一项回顾性病例对照研究。
PLoS One. 2020 Aug 11;15(8):e0236711. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0236711. eCollection 2020.
5
Transmission center and driving factors of hand, foot, and mouth disease in China: A combined analysis.中国手足口病的传播中心和驱动因素:综合分析。
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2020 Mar 9;14(3):e0008070. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0008070. eCollection 2020 Mar.
6
Efficacy of disinfectant-impregnated wipes used for surface disinfection in hospitals: a review.消毒剂浸渍湿巾用于医院表面消毒的效果:综述。
Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2019 Aug 19;8:139. doi: 10.1186/s13756-019-0595-2. eCollection 2019.
7
The Modelling of Hand, Foot, and Mouth Disease in Contaminated Environments in Bangkok, Thailand.泰国曼谷受污染环境中手足口病的建模
Comput Math Methods Med. 2018 Jun 3;2018:5168931. doi: 10.1155/2018/5168931. eCollection 2018.
8
Efficacy of ethanol against viruses in hand disinfection.乙醇对手部消毒中病毒的杀灭效果。
J Hosp Infect. 2018 Apr;98(4):331-338. doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2017.08.025. Epub 2017 Sep 5.
9
Development and virucidal activity of a novel alcohol-based hand disinfectant supplemented with urea and citric acid.一种添加了尿素和柠檬酸的新型酒精基手部消毒剂的研发及其杀病毒活性
BMC Infect Dis. 2016 Feb 11;16:77. doi: 10.1186/s12879-016-1410-9.
10
Therapeutic and prevention strategies against human enterovirus 71 infection.针对人类肠道病毒71型感染的治疗与预防策略。
World J Virol. 2015 May 12;4(2):78-95. doi: 10.5501/wjv.v4.i2.78.