Reybrouck G
Zentralbl Bakteriol Mikrobiol Hyg B Umwelthyg Krankenhaushyg Arbeitshyg Prav Med. 1986 Oct;182(5-6):485-98.
Several European countries have adopted the evaluation of the microbicidal properties of disinfectants in two stages: after some preliminary tests, tests under practical conditions or main tests are carried out, as was described originally in the German guidelines for the testing of disinfectants. Nevertheless in the Anglosaxon countries, the use dilution of products intended for surface and floor disinfection is determined by suspension tests, capacity tests, or carrier tests. In some European countries, however, tests under practical conditions are developed for this purpose, but if these Belgian (B), German (D), French (F) and Dutch (NL) techniques are analysed and compared in their composing elements, great differences are found (Tables 1 to 3). Therefore the Belgian and Dutch tests must be the more severe. Another example of discordance is given in the preoperative disinfection of the surgeons' hand. Between 1973 and 1984 23 different testing techniques were described (Table 4). The differences in technique explain the differences in results obtained. In order to achieve a greater unification of the testing techniques, it is desirable to agree firstly on the requirements of disinfectants. Perhaps it is time to discuss it again.
经过一些初步测试后，进行实际条件下的测试或主要测试，这最初是在德国消毒剂测试指南中描述的。然而，在盎格鲁撒克逊国家，用于表面和地板消毒的产品的使用稀释度是通过悬液试验、容量试验或载体试验来确定的。然而，在一些欧洲国家，为此目的开发了实际条件下的测试，但如果对比分析比利时（B）、德国（D）、法国（F）和荷兰（NL）的这些技术的组成要素，会发现存在很大差异（表1至3）。因此，比利时和荷兰的测试一定更为严格。另一个不一致的例子是外科医生手部的术前消毒。1973年至1984年间描述了23种不同的测试技术（表4）。技术上的差异解释了所获得结果的差异。为了使测试技术更加统一，首先有必要就消毒剂的要求达成一致。也许是时候再次讨论这个问题了。
