Ayliffe G A, Babb J R, Davies J G, Lilly H A
Hospital Infection Research Laboratory, Dudley Road Hospital, Birmingham.
J Hosp Infect. 1988 Apr;11(3):226-43. doi: 10.1016/0195-6701(88)90101-6.
The efficacy of 14 handwashing or disinfectant preparations was compared in laboratory tests on staff volunteers. The test organism, Escherichia coli, was applied to the fingertips and log reductions (LR) were measured following treatment with the test agent and control preparations (70% isopropanol and non-medicated bar soap). Alcoholic preparations, particularly n-propanol and isopropanol were the most effective showing LRs of 3.1-3.8. Chlorhexidine (LR 2.9) and povidone-iodine detergent preparations were significantly more effective than non-medicated soap (LR 2.1), but triclosan products were not. In addition the residual effect of several of these formulations was assessed after 10 applications by comparing the survival of E. coli on the fingertips over a 32-min period. This number of handwashes compares favourably with those recorded during an 8 h nursing shift. Chlorhexidine-detergent consistently showed the best residual activity. Alcoholic formulations showed little or no residual effect. The survival studies show that on the whole gram-positive organisms (Staphylococcus aureus and Candida albicans) survive better on the skin than Gram-negative bacilli (GNB). However, it would seem that GNB which are considered to be residents (Acinetobacter calcoaceticus and Enterobacter spp.) survive much better than many other GNB (Pseudomonas aeruginosa, E. coli and Proteus vulgaris). The Klebsiella species varied in survival times. Random sampling of ward staff hands showed that contamination with S. aureus and GNB was greater in dermatological and general wards than in an isolation unit, where handwashing or disinfection was carried out after every patient contact. No cross-infection occurred in the isolation ward during periods of study in which 70% alcohol, chlorhexidine-detergent and non-medicated soap were used.
在针对工作人员志愿者的实验室测试中,对14种洗手或消毒制剂的效果进行了比较。将测试微生物大肠杆菌涂抹在指尖上,在用测试剂和对照制剂(70%异丙醇和无药皂)处理后测量对数减少值(LR)。含酒精制剂,尤其是正丙醇和异丙醇最为有效,对数减少值为3.1 - 3.8。洗必泰(对数减少值2.9)和聚维酮碘洗涤剂制剂比无药皂(对数减少值2.1)显著更有效,但三氯生产品并非如此。此外,在10次应用后,通过比较大肠杆菌在指尖上32分钟内的存活情况,评估了其中几种制剂的残留效果。这种洗手次数与8小时护理班次记录的次数相比很可观。洗必泰洗涤剂始终显示出最佳的残留活性。含酒精制剂几乎没有或没有残留效果。存活研究表明,总体而言革兰氏阳性菌(金黄色葡萄球菌和白色念珠菌)在皮肤上的存活情况比革兰氏阴性杆菌(GNB)更好。然而,似乎被认为是常驻菌的革兰氏阴性杆菌(醋酸钙不动杆菌和肠杆菌属)比许多其他革兰氏阴性杆菌(铜绿假单胞菌、大肠杆菌和普通变形杆菌)存活得好得多。克雷伯菌属的存活时间各不相同。对病房工作人员手部的随机抽样显示,皮肤科病房和普通病房的金黄色葡萄球菌和革兰氏阴性杆菌污染程度高于隔离病房,在隔离病房中,每次接触患者后都要进行洗手或消毒。在使用70%酒精、洗必泰洗涤剂和无药皂的研究期间,隔离病房未发生交叉感染。