Aly R, Maibach H I
Appl Environ Microbiol. 1979 Mar;37(3):610-3. doi: 10.1128/aem.37.3.610-613.1979.
A gloved-hand wash method was used to compare the antimicrobial effect of chlorhexidine gluconate alcohol emollient hand wash (HIBISTAT) with that of 70% isopropyl alcohol on the normal flora of the hands (81 subjects) under conditions designed to mimic use by surgeons. Results of the immediate postwash effects on the bacterial counts for all 3 tests days showed that chlorhexidine significantly reduced the normal flora of the hands. When compared with the base line bacterial counts, there was 85, 96, and 98% reduction with chlorhexidine treatment and 84, 93, and 90% reduction with alcohol treatment on days 1,2, and 5, respectively. The difference between chlorhexidine and alcohol treatments was not statistically significant on days 1 and 2, but was significant on day 5 (P less than 0.01). For delayed postwash bacterial counts (for persistent antimicrobial effects), the overall log means were 4.9943 and 5.4684 for chlorhexidine and alcohol treatments, respectively. The difference between the two treatments was significant (P less than 0.01). After the chlorhexidien treatment, there was no significant growth of bacteria over a period of 6 h when compared with the base line bacterial counts.
采用戴手套洗手方法,在模拟外科医生使用的条件下,比较葡萄糖酸洗必泰酒精润肤洗手液(HIBISTAT)与70%异丙醇对81名受试者手部正常菌群的抗菌效果。在所有3个测试日的洗手后即时对细菌计数的结果显示,洗必泰能显著减少手部的正常菌群。与基线细菌计数相比,在第1、2和5天,洗必泰处理后细菌计数分别减少了85%、96%和98%,酒精处理后分别减少了84%、93%和90%。洗必泰与酒精处理之间的差异在第1天和第2天无统计学意义,但在第5天有统计学意义(P小于0.01)。对于洗手后延迟的细菌计数(持续抗菌效果),洗必泰处理和酒精处理的总体对数均值分别为4.9943和5.4684。两种处理之间的差异有统计学意义(P小于0.01)。洗必泰处理后,与基线细菌计数相比,在6小时内细菌没有显著生长。