Faculty of Health and Healthcare Sciences, University of Applied Sciences Zwickau, Zwickau, Germany.
University of Fulda, Fulda, Germany.
Sci Rep. 2024 Sep 17;14(1):21703. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-72524-7.
The introduction of fundamental hygiene protocols within the healthcare sector during the nineteenth century led to a significant reduction in mortality rates. Contemporary advancements, such as alcohol-based sanitizers, have further enhanced hand hygiene practices. However, these measures are often overlooked in nursing facilities, resulting in low staff compliance rates and increased cross-infection rates. Novel approaches, such as cold plasma hand disinfection, present promising alternatives due to their minimal skin damage and economic benefits. This study aims to compare the disinfectant efficacy of cold plasma aerosol under practical application conditions with an alcoholic hand disinfectant listed by the Association for Applied Hygiene. The microbial count on participants' hands was measured, with particular attention paid to the spontaneous occurrence of fecal indicators and the presence of potentially infectious bacteria. A t-test for independent samples was conducted to determine whether there was a significant difference between the two cohorts regarding the research question. Statistical analysis revealed that the mean log colony-forming unit (CFU) values were significantly lower in the test cohort using only the cold plasma method for hand disinfection compared to the cohort using conventional alcohol-based hand disinfection. Moreover, it was demonstrated that, unlike alcohol-based hand disinfection, cold plasma application ensures the effective elimination of Staphylococcus aureus. The findings indicate that staff utilizing plasma disinfection have an average bacterial count that is 0.65 log units lower than those who regularly use alcohol-based hand disinfection. In addition to the efficacy of cold plasma disinfection, its superiority over alcohol-based hand disinfection was also established. Beyond offering economic and logistical advantages, cold plasma disinfection provides additional health benefits as it does not induce skin damage, unlike alcohol-based hand disinfection.
19 世纪，医疗卫生领域引入基本卫生规范，使得死亡率显著降低。当代的进步，如含酒精的消毒剂，进一步增强了手部卫生措施。然而，这些措施在护理机构中经常被忽视，导致员工遵守率低，交叉感染率增加。新型方法，如冷等离子体手部消毒，由于其对皮肤的损伤较小和经济效益，提供了有前景的替代方法。本研究旨在比较冷等离子体气溶胶在实际应用条件下与协会推荐的含酒精手部消毒剂的消毒效果。测量参与者手上的微生物数量，特别注意粪便指示物的自发出现和潜在感染性细菌的存在。采用独立样本 t 检验来确定两组在研究问题上是否存在显著差异。统计分析显示，与使用常规含酒精手部消毒剂的对照组相比，仅使用冷等离子体方法进行手部消毒的试验组的平均对数菌落形成单位（CFU）值显著降低。此外，与含酒精的手部消毒不同，冷等离子体的应用确保了有效消除金黄色葡萄球菌。研究结果表明，使用等离子体消毒的员工的平均细菌计数比经常使用含酒精的手部消毒剂的员工低 0.65 个对数单位。除了冷等离子体消毒的功效外，还证明了其优于含酒精的手部消毒。冷等离子体消毒不仅提供了经济和后勤方面的优势，还提供了额外的健康益处，因为它不像含酒精的手部消毒那样会引起皮肤损伤。
