An evaluation of five protocols for surgical handwashing in relation to skin condition and microbial counts

General principles of surgery applied to cattle

Basic principles of surgery are important to review, even for experienced surgeons. Although aseptic surgical principles are not always applicable in the field, we have to respect some guidelines. Recent research will influence the way that we do things, based on what we have been taught and our experience. Respecting those simple principles can make a big difference in the final outcome.

Epidemiologic background of hand hygiene and evaluation of the most important agents for scrubs and rubs

The etiology of nosocomial infections, the frequency of contaminated hands with the different nosocomial pathogens, and the role of health care workers' hands during outbreaks suggest that a hand hygiene preparation should at least have activity against bacteria, yeasts, and coated viruses. The importance of efficacy in choosing the right hand hygiene product is reflected in the new Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guideline on hand hygiene (J. M. Boyce and D. Pittet, Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep. 51:1-45, 2002). The best antimicrobial efficacy can be achieved with ethanol (60 to 85%), isopropanol (60 to 80%), and n-propanol (60 to 80%). The activity is broad and immediate. Ethanol at high concentrations (e.g., 95%) is the most effective treatment against naked viruses, whereas n-propanol seems to be more effective against the resident bacterial flora. The combination of alcohols may have a synergistic effect. The antimicrobial efficacy of chlorhexidine (2 to 4%) and triclosan (1 to 2%) is both lower and slower. Additionally, both agents have a risk of bacterial resistance, which is higher for chlorhexidine than triclosan. Their activity is often supported by the mechanical removal of pathogens during hand washing. Taking the antimicrobial efficacy and the mechanical removal together, they are still less effective than the alcohols. Plain soap and water has the lowest efficacy of all. In the new Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guideline, promotion of alcohol-based hand rubs containing various emollients instead of irritating soaps and detergents is one strategy to reduce skin damage, dryness, and irritation. Irritant contact dermatitis is highest with preparations containing 4% chlorhexidine gluconate, less frequent with nonantimicrobial soaps and preparations containing lower concentrations of chlorhexidine gluconate, and lowest with well-formulated alcohol-based hand rubs containing emollients and other skin conditioners. Too few published data from comparative trials are available to reliably rank triclosan. Personnel should be reminded that it is neither necessary nor recommended to routinely wash hands after each application of an alcohol-based hand rub. Long-lasting improvement of compliance with hand hygiene protocols can be successful if an effective and accessible alcohol-based hand rub with a proven dermal tolerance and an excellent user acceptability is supplied, accompanied by education of health care workers and promotion of the use of the product.

A systematic review on the effectiveness of alcohol-based solutions for hand hygiene

The use of alcohol has been proposed as an option for hand hygiene. A systematic review was conducted to evaluate the clinical evidence supporting the use of alcohol-based solutions in hospitals as an option for hand hygiene. Studies published between January 1992 and April 2002 in English and Thai, related to the effectiveness of alcohol-based solutions, were reviewed. The databases searched included Medline, DARE, CINAHL and Dissertation Abstracts International. All studies were assessed as having adequate methodological quality. Results of this systematic review supported that alcohol-based hand rubbing removes microorganisms effectively, requires less time and irritates hands less often than does handwashing with soap or other antiseptic agents and water. Furthermore, the availability of bedside alcohol-based solutions increases compliance with hand hygiene among health care workers.

Effectiveness of Alcohol-based solutions for Hand Hygiene: A Systematic Review

: Hand hygiene is an important measure in reducing the transmission of nosocomial infections in hospitals, but adherence is poor among health care workers (HCWs).More rapid and effective hand disinfection procedures have been proposed, such as rubbing with alcohol.Hand rubbing with alcohol-based products is commonly used in some countries instead of handwashing. This review evaluates the scientific and clinical evidence on the use of alcohol-based hand rubs in health care settings as a new option for hand hygiene.

OBJECTIVES

To conduct a systematic review to determine the best available evidence related to effectiveness of alcohol-based solutions for hand hygiene. The specific review questions addressed were: the effectiveness in reducing microorganisms, compliance with hand hygiene, and the incidence of skin problems. Application time (consumption) addressed efficiency.

CRITERIA FOR CONSIDERING STUDIES IN THIS REVIEW

This review considered all studies that included alcohol-based solutions that related to the objectives of the review. Outcomes included measures for the reduction of organisms, compliance with hand hygiene, the types of skin problems, and application time. The review primarily considered any intra-individual trials (IITs), randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) relating to the effectiveness of alcohol-based solutions but also included quasi-experimental designs.

SEARCH STRATEGY FOR IDENTIFICATION OF STUDIES

The search sought to find published and unpublished studies. The databases searched included: Medline, CINAHL, ProQuest and Dissertation Abstracts International. Studies were additionally identified from reference lists of all studies retrieved.

ASSESSMENT AND DATA EXTRACTION

All studies were checked for methodological quality by two reviewers and data were extracted using a tool.

DATA ANALYSIS

The study results were pooled in statistical meta-analysis using Review Manager software and summarized in narrative form where statistical pooling was not appropriate or possible.

RESULTS

This systematic review included thirty seven studies that supports the use of alcohol-based solutions for routine hand hygiene and surgical hand scrub. Alcohol-based hand rub removes microorganisms from hands of personnel more effectively, requires less time, and irritates hands less often than traditional handwashing with nonmedicated soap or other antiseptic agents and water. The combination of 61% ethanol and 1% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) is even more effective in producing residual antibacterial properties on the skin. Furthermore, the availability of bedside alcohol-based solutions increased compliance with hand hygiene among HCWs.

CONCLUSION

Rubbing hands with alcohol-based agents has been proved to be effective in the reduction of microorganisms from hands. Alcohols are effective for preoperative cleaning of the hands of surgical personnel. Addition of CHG to alcohol-based solution can produce residual antibacterial properties on the skin. The use of alcohol-based solutions containing emollients causes less skin irritation and dryness and requires less time than washing hands with soap or other disinfectants. The promotion of bedside, alcohol-based hand rubs contributes to the increase in compliance with hand hygiene by HCWs.

Guideline for Hand Hygiene in Health-Care Settings. Recommendations of the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee and the HIPAC/SHEA/APIC/IDSA Hand Hygiene Task Force

The Guideline for Hand Hygiene in Health-Care Settings provides health-care workers (HCWs) with a review of data regarding handwashing and hand antisepsis in health-care settings. In addition, it provides specific recommendations to promote improved hand-hygiene practices and reduce transmission of pathogenic microorganisms to patients and personnel in health-care settings. This report reviews studies published since the 1985 CDC guideline (Garner JS, Favero MS. CDC guideline for handwashing and hospital environmental control, 1985. Infect Control 1986;7:231-43) and the 1995 APIC guideline (Larson EL, APIC Guidelines Committee. APIC guideline for handwashing and hand antisepsis in health care settings. Am J Infect Control 1995;23:251-69) were issued and provides an in-depth review of hand-hygiene practices of HCWs, levels of adherence of personnel to recommended handwashing practices, and factors adversely affecting adherence. New studies of the in vivo efficacy of alcohol-based hand rubs and the low incidence of dermatitis associated with their use are reviewed. Recent studies demonstrating the value of multidisciplinary hand-hygiene promotion programs and the potential role of alcohol-based hand rubs in improving hand-hygiene practices are summarized. Recommendations concerning related issues (e.g., the use of surgical hand antiseptics, hand lotions or creams, and wearing of artificial fingernails) are also included.

Guideline for Hand Hygiene in Health-Care Settings: recommendations of the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee and the HICPAC/SHEA/APIC/IDSA Hand Hygiene Task Force

The Guideline for Hand Hygiene in Health-Care Settings provides health-care workers (HCWs) with a review of data regarding handwashing and hand antisepsis in health-care settings. In addition, it provides specific recommendations to promote improved hand-hygiene practices and reduce transmission of pathogenic microorganisms to patients and personnel in health-care settings. This report reviews studies published since the 1985 CDC guideline (Garner JS, Favero MS. CDC guideline for handwashing and hospital environmental control, 1985. Infect Control 1986;7:231-43) and the 1995 APIC guideline (Larson EL, APIC Guidelines Committee. APIC guideline for handwashing and hand antisepsis in health care settings. Am J Infect Control 1995;23:251-69) were issued and provides an in-depth review of hand-hygiene practices of HCWs, levels of adherence of personnel to recommended handwashing practices, and factors adversely affecting adherence. New studies of the in vivo efficacy of alcohol-based hand rubs and the low incidence of dermatitis associated with their use are reviewed. Recent studies demonstrating the value of multidisciplinary hand-hygiene promotion programs and the potential role of alcohol-based hand rubs in improving hand-hygiene practices are summarized. Recommendations concerning related issues (e.g., the use of surgical hand antiseptics, hand lotions or creams, and wearing of artificial fingernails) are also included.

Sustained ex vivo skin antiseptic activity of chlorhexidine in poly(epsilon-caprolactone) nanocapsule encapsulated form and as a digluconate

In this work, the sustained bactericidal activity of chlorhexidine base loaded poly(epsilon-caprolactone), PCL, nanocapsules against Staphylococcus epidermidis inoculated onto porcine ear skin was investigated. Drug loaded nanocapsules were prepared by the interfacial polymer deposition following solvent displacement method, then characterized by photon correlation spectroscopy, electrophoretic measurements, transmission and scanning electron microscopy. Antimicrobial activity of these colloidal carriers was evaluated (i) in vitro against eight strains of bacteria, and (ii) ex vivo against Staphylococcus epidermidis inoculated for 12 h onto porcine ear skin surface treated for 3 min either with 0.6% chlorhexidine base loaded or unloaded nanocapsules suspended in hydrogel, or 1% chlorhexidine digluconate aqueous solution. Chlorhexidine absorption into the stratum corneum (SC) was evaluated by the tape-stripping method. The results showed that chlorhexidine nanocapsules in aqueous suspension having a 200-300 nm size and a positive charge exhibited similar minimum inhibitory concentrations against several bacteria with chlorhexidine digluconate aqueous solution. Ex vivo, there was a significant reduction in the number of colony forming units (CFUs) from 3-min treated skin with chlorhexidine nanocapsule suspension (5 to <1 log(10)) compared to chlorhexidine digluconate solution (5 to 2.02 log(10)) after a 8-h artificial contamination. After a 12-h artificial contamination, both formulations failed to achieve a 5 log(10) reduction. Furthermore, from a 3-min treatment with an identical applied dose and a subsequent 12-h artificial contamination, a residual chlorhexidine concentration in the SC was found to be three-fold higher with chlorhexidine nanocapsule suspension than with chlorhexidine digluconate solution. Interestingly, nanocapsules were shown in porcine skin follicles. Consequently, a topical application of chlorhexidine base-loaded positively charged nanocapsules in an aqueous gel achieved a sustained release of bactericide against Staphylococcus epidermidis for at least 8 h. Enhancement of drug delivery by mediating a more direct and prolonged contact between the carrier and (i) bacteria, (ii) skin surface, and (iii) skin follicles was assumed.

Scrubbing for cutaneous procedures can be hazardous

Office-based minor cutaneous surgery is a service provided by many medical practitioners. In New South Wales, Australia, it is a legal requirement for practitioners to surgically scrub before donning sterile gloves for all forms of invasive surgery, including minor cutaneous procedures. Frequent scrubbing causes altered skin barrier function, irritant dermatitis and a potential risk of latex sensitization. These adverse effects are associated with significant morbidity and cost. Better tolerated alternatives, including alcohol-based hand rubs, should be considered in preference to traditional surgical scrubs in order to reduce these occupational risks for minor proceduralists. Well-controlled, prospective studies should explore what extent of hand washing is necessary for donning sterile gloves for minor cutaneous surgery.

Effect of an evidence-based hand washing policy on hand washing rates and false-positive coagulase negative staphylococcus blood and cerebrospinal fluid culture rates in a level III NICU

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of implementing an evidence-based hand washing policy on between-patient hand washing compliance and on blood and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) culture rates in a level III neonatal intensive care unit (NICU).

METHODS

An evidence-based hand washing policy, supported by an intensive education program, was introduced in a regional NICU. A total of 2009 preintervention neonates (16,168 patient days) over 17 months were compared to 676 postintervention neonates (5779 patient days) over 6 months. Hand washing compliance and rates of blood and CSF cultures yielding coagulase negative staphylococci (CONS) were compared before and after intervention.

RESULTS

Compliance with appropriate between-patient hand washing improved (from 47.4% to 85.4%, p=0.001) after the hand washing policy was introduced. The rate of cultures positive for CONS declined from 6.1+/-2.3 to 3.2+/-1.6 per 1000 patient days (p=0.005). Most of this reduction was attributable to a reduction in false-positive cultures, from 4.2+/-2.4 to 1.9+/-1.8 per 1000 patient days (p=0.042), but there was a trend toward decreased true-positive cultures (from 2.1+/-1.2 to 1.2+/-1.0 per 1000 patient days, p=0.074) as well. Potential confounders and demographics factors were similar between the control and intervention subjects.

CONCLUSION

Implementation of an evidence-based hand washing policy resulted in a significant increase in hand washing compliance and a significant decrease in false-positive coagulase negative staphylococcal blood and CSF culture rates. Exploratory data analysis revealed a possible effect on true-positive coagulase negative staphylococcal blood and CSF culture rates, but these results need to be confirmed in future studies.

A new alcohol solution (N-duopropenide) for hygienic (or routine) hand disinfection is more useful than classic handwashing: in vitro and in vivo studies in burn and other intensive care units

INTRODUCTION

Standard handwashing is a key measure for the prevention of crossed nosocomial infection, but this measure is not always observed. We study whether fast disinfection with an alcohol solution is better than handwashing and whether it can enhance observance.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The effects of several alcohol solutions on native and acquired microbiota are compared with classic handwashing in 'in vitro' and 'in vivo' (health volunteers) quantitative tests. A field assay was subsequently performed in severely ill patient intensive care units (ICUs) (Burn and other ICUs), using a semiquantitative method to compare the effects of disinfection with standard handwashing (n=102) with N-duopropenide alcohol application (n=264).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In both designs--health volunteers and hospital ward teams--we found significant differences between handwashing and N-duopropenide application. Handwashing barely modified the native or acquired microbiota (only 0.1 to <2 log10 reduction) and did not eliminate Staphylococcus aureus and Gram-negative bacteria (from 34 to 23%: P>0.05). However, N-duopropenide reduced the acquired microbiota by 5 log (10) and the native hand microbiota by more than 2 log10, as well as significantly reducing S. aureus and Gram-negative bacteria (33-1.3%; P<0.01).

An in-use evaluation of an alcohol-based pre-surgical hand disinfectant

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether alcohol hand disinfection is an effective alternative to traditional agents for the pre-surgical scrub.

DESIGN

A prospective clinical trial of a 70% isopropanol pre-surgical hand disinfectant.

SETTING

The operating room suites at two hospital sites in British Columbia.

METHODS

Cases were selected to evaluate both short and longer procedures. The hand disinfectant was compared to agents in current use as surgical scrubs (4% chlorhexidine and 7.5% povidone-iodine). Surgical technique and glove use were not modified. Pre- and postoperative fingertip impression and "glove-juice" cultures were used to determine microbial burden, and hands were evaluated for skin integrity.

RESULTS

There was no statistical difference between the microbial hand counts following use of the alcohol-based product or the current agents, for cases less than 2 hours' duration. Comparison of longer surgical cases revealed significantly better pre- and postoperative culture results with the alcohol hand rinse, but analysis of matched pairs showed no significant difference in microbial counts. The alcohol hand rinse was equivalent to the operative scrub in terms of skin integrity and user acceptability.

CONCLUSION

An alcohol hand rinse was equivalently effective in reducing microbial hand counts as the traditional pre-surgical scrub, both immediately after hand disinfection and at the end of the surgical procedure.

Irritancy of the skin disinfectant n-propanol

Hand disinfection with short-chain aliphatic alcohols, so-called "rub-ins" is the method of choice for cross-infection prevention in health care environments, but their irritant potential is not well known. Skin tolerance is a major compliance factor, and a high proportion of health care workers suffer from low-grade irritant contact dermatitis. Therefore, assessment of the irritancy of the skin disinfectant n-propanol 60%, and comparative 100% and 0% solutions, was performed in the setting of experimental low-grade ICD. ICD was induced by overnight patch exposure to H2O, and to 0.3% sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS), in 12 probands, followed by repeated open exposure to the test substances. Outcome variables were transepidermal water loss (TEWL), and skin surface capacitance. On skin sites pre-irritated by SDS, all n-propanol concentrations (100%, 60%, 0%) increased TEWL. However, a clear divergence appeared between pure n-propanol, and the lower concentrations. In contrast to pure n-propanol, n-propanol 60% and 0% had no significant effect on TEWL on H2O-pre-irritated skin sites. Capacitance of pre-irritated skin sites was increased by exposure to H2O-containing n-propanol solutions (60% and 0%). These results show a clear difference between the irritant potential of n-propanol 100% on one side, and n-propanol 60% and 0% on the other side. The level of pre-existent skin irritation is a pertinent factor in susceptibility to irritation, as the irritant potential of n-propanol 60%, the concentration used in daily practice, and n-propanol 0% (water) became significant only on detergent-irritated skin. Thus, preventive skin care may be a constructive approach in increasing tolerance of modern hand disinfection practices.

Assessment of two hand hygiene regimens for intensive care unit personnel

OBJECTIVE

To compare skin condition and skin microbiology among intensive care unit personnel using one of two randomly assigned hand hygiene regimens: a 2% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG)-containing traditional antiseptic wash and a waterless handrub containing 61% ethanol with emollients (ALC).

DESIGN

Prospective, randomized clinical trial.

SETTING

Two critical care units (medical and surgical) in a large, metropolitan academic health center in Manhattan.

SUBJECTS

Fifty staff members (physicians, nurses, housekeepers, respiratory therapists) working full time in the intensive care unit.

INTERVENTIONS

One of two hand hygiene regimens randomly assigned for four consecutive weeks.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The two outcomes were skin condition (measured by two tools: Hand Skin Assessment form and Visual Skin Scaling form) and skin microbiology. Samples were obtained at baseline, on day 1, and at the end of wks 2 and 4. Participants in the ALC group had significant improvements in the Hand Skin Assessment scores at wk 4 (p = 0.04) and in Visual Skin Scaling scores at wks 3 (p = 0.01) and 4 (p = 0.0005). There were no significant differences in numbers of colony-forming units between participants in the CHG or ALC group at any time period. The ALC regimen required significantly less time than the CHG regimen (mean: 12.7 secs and 21.1 secs, respectively; p = 0.000) and resulted in a 50% reduction in material costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Changes in hand hygiene practices in acute care settings from the traditional antiseptic wash to use of plain, mild soap and an alcohol-based product should be considered. Further research is needed to examine the association between use of antiseptic products for hand hygiene of staff and reductions in nosocomial infection rates among patients.

Comparison of different regimens for surgical hand preparation

Twenty surgical staff members participated in a clinical trial to compare the microbiology and skin condition of hands when using a traditional surgical scrub (TSS) with a detergent-based antiseptic containing 4% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) and a short application without scrub of a waterless hand preparation (HP) containing 61% ethyl alcohol, 1% CHG, and emollients. The HP was associated with less skin damage (P = .002) and lower microbial counts postscrub at days five (P = .002) and 19 (P = .02). The HP protocol had shorter contact time (HP mean [M] = 80.7 seconds; TSS M = 144.9 seconds; P < .0001), and more subjects preferred the HP regimen (P = .001). The HP performed better than the TSS, was less costly, and should be evaluated in larger trials and considered for widespread implementation.

Diathermy and alcohol skin preparations - a potential disastrous mix

Disinfectant solutions with high concentrations of alcohol are used in many operating theatres as skin preparation. We present two cases of burns as a result of accidental ignition of the solution and list precautionary measures for the use of these solutions.

Usefulness of an alcohol solution of N-duopropenide for the surgical antisepsis of the hands compared with handwashing with iodine-povidone and chlorhexidine: clinical essay

BACKGROUND

The usual surgical antisepsis involves scrubbing the skin with antiseptic solutions. This procedure can damage the skin, with the subsequent risk of infection for the patient. There are several efficient and quick-acting antiseptic alcohol solutions that require no scrubbing.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We compare four alcohol solutions with the classic surgical handwashing products (chlorhexidine and iodine-povidone), in both in vitro (pigskin germ carriers) and in vivo studies. The latter (clinical essays) were done with healthy volunteers (crossed design) as well as with 154 surgical team members (Plastic Surgery or Traumatology), whose hand microbial flora were measured before and after scrubbing up and after surgery.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Because of its efficiency in the germ carrier, we chose a solution of N-duopropenide in 60 degrees alcohol with emollients for further comparison with the standard surgical scrub: 4% chlorhexidine and 7.5% iodine-povidone. The quantitative, semiquantitative, and qualitative results obtained with N-duopropenide without scrubbing were better in the healthy volunteers and surgical teams. This product reduced hand microorganisms by more than 2 log, and maintained the reduction for the entire study period. Four percent chlorhexidine initially reduced colonization more than 2 log but lost part of its effect over time during the surgical intervention. Last, 7.5% iodine-povidone reduced the germs by 1 log but at the end of surgery there were even more germs than before washing.

CONCLUSION

Because of its efficacy, persistent effect, and skin protection, we advise that scrubbing with classic antiseptic solutions be replaced with gentle washing with an alcohol solution such as N-duopropenide in alcohol.

A novel approach using an attenuated recombinant vaccinia virus to test the antipoxviral effects of handsoaps

Evidence indicates an increase in nosocomial and household infections due to viruses (Jeffries, D.J., 1995. Viral hazards to and from health care workers. J. Hosp. Infect. 30, 140-155). An antiviral assay was developed for evaluating efficiency of handsoaps at inactivating cell-free and cell-associated virus. A recombinant vaccinia virus, lacking a virulence factor (Isaacs, S.N., Kotwal, G.J., Moss, B., 1992. Vaccinia virus complement-control protein prevents antibody-dependent complement-enhanced neutralization of infectivity and contributes to virulence. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 89, 628-632), whose construction was described earlier (Kotwal, G.J., Isaacs, S.N., McKenzie, R., Frank, M.M., Moss, B., 1990. Inhibition of the complement cascade by the major secretory protein of vaccinia virus. Science 250, 827-830), was used as the representative poxvirus. Two antibacterial handsoaps, one surgical handsoap, one moisturizing handsoap, and a sanitizing agent were tested. An aliquot of the virus was mixed and incubated with soap, then titrated onto BSC-1 cells for incubation at 37 degrees C for 48 h. The soaps' effect on cell-associated virus was tested similarly. The antibacterial soaps inactivated all cell-free virus in 1 min. The surgical soap was effective with a 5-min incubation. None of the soaps eliminated all of the cell-associated virus in 1 min. This safe and reproducible assay seems efficient to establish the comparative efficacy of household and surgical soaps.