• 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

含氯二甲酚与含葡萄糖酸氯己定手术擦手制剂的抗菌效果

The antiseptic efficacy of chlorxylenol-containing vs. chlorhexidine gluconate-containing surgical scrub preparations.

作者信息

Soulsby M E, Barnett J B, Maddox S

出版信息

Infect Control. 1986 Apr;7(4):223-6. doi: 10.1017/s0195941700083995.

DOI:10.1017/s0195941700083995
PMID:3634761
Abstract

The studies described here evaluate the efficacy of the chlorxylenol-containing surgical scrub formulations against the chlorhexidine gluconate-containing formulations using the Glove Juice Test, as recommended by the FDA's panel to develop guidelines for the study of antiseptic agents. Similar reports from the literature evaluating the relative efficacies of the iodophor-containing and the hexachlorophene-containing formulations are cited. Results fail to detect any significant differences in the efficacy of these two preparations, each significantly reducing the bacterial flora on the hands as indicated by immediate post-wash colony counts, and each demonstrating the continuing ability to significantly reduce bacterial growth with continued regular use.

摘要

此处所述研究按照美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)专家小组推荐的用于制定抗菌剂研究指南的“手套汁液试验”,评估了含氯二甲酚的手术擦洗制剂相对于含葡萄糖酸氯己定制剂的功效。文中还引用了文献中评估含碘伏制剂和含六氯酚制剂相对功效的类似报告。结果未能检测出这两种制剂在功效上有任何显著差异,两种制剂均能显著减少洗手后立即进行的菌落计数所显示的手上细菌菌群,并且都表明持续定期使用具有持续显著减少细菌生长的能力。

相似文献

1
The antiseptic efficacy of chlorxylenol-containing vs. chlorhexidine gluconate-containing surgical scrub preparations.含氯二甲酚与含葡萄糖酸氯己定手术擦手制剂的抗菌效果
Infect Control. 1986 Apr;7(4):223-6. doi: 10.1017/s0195941700083995.
2
Evaluation of a waterless, scrubless chlorhexidine gluconate/ethanol surgical scrub for antimicrobial efficacy.对一种无水、免刷的葡萄糖酸洗必泰/乙醇手术 scrub 进行抗菌效果评估。
Am J Infect Control. 2001 Dec;29(6):377-82. doi: 10.1067/mic.2001.118842.
3
Computerized image analysis of full-hand touch plates: a method for quantification of surface bacteria on hands and the effect of antimicrobial agents.全手触摸板的计算机图像分析:一种定量手部表面细菌及抗菌剂效果的方法。
J Hosp Infect. 1991 Jun;18 Suppl B:13-22. doi: 10.1016/0195-6701(91)90258-a.
4
[Comparison of antibacterial effects of different antiseptics after hand washing].[洗手后不同防腐剂抗菌效果的比较]
Mikrobiyol Bul. 2004 Jan-Apr;38(1-2):137-43.
5
Comparative evaluation of surgical scrub preparations.手术刷手制剂的比较评估
Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1978 Jan;146(1):63-5.
6
Comparison of the antimicrobial efficacy of povidone-iodine, povidone-iodine-ethanol and chlorhexidine gluconate-ethanol surgical scrubs.聚维酮碘、聚维酮碘 - 乙醇及葡萄糖酸氯己定 - 乙醇外科洗手剂抗菌效果的比较
Dermatology. 2006;212 Suppl 1:21-5. doi: 10.1159/000089195.
7
Reproducibility and workability of the European test standard EN 12791 regarding the effectiveness of surgical hand antiseptics: a randomized, multicenter trial.关于外科手消毒剂有效性的欧洲测试标准EN 12791的可重复性和实用性:一项随机多中心试验。
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2006 Sep;27(9):935-9. doi: 10.1086/507283. Epub 2006 Aug 22.
8
Antiseptic efficacies of waterless hand rub, chlorhexidine scrub, and povidone-iodine scrub in surgical settings: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.无水手部清洁剂、洗必泰刷手和聚维酮碘刷手在手术环境中的消毒效果:随机对照试验的荟萃分析。
J Hosp Infect. 2019 Apr;101(4):370-379. doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2018.11.012. Epub 2018 Nov 28.
9
An evaluation of five protocols for surgical handwashing in relation to skin condition and microbial counts.关于皮肤状况和微生物计数对五种外科洗手方案的评估。
J Hosp Infect. 1997 May;36(1):49-65. doi: 10.1016/s0195-6701(97)90090-6.
10
Factors affecting bacterial counts during preparation of the hands for aseptic surgery.影响无菌手术手部准备过程中细菌计数的因素。
Vet Rec. 2007 Jun 30;160(26):897-901. doi: 10.1136/vr.160.26.897.