Effectiveness Of Hand Washing Research Articles

Efficacy of alcohol-based hand rinses under frequent-use conditions

Fifty volunteers randomly assigned to one of five hand washing agents (10 subjects per agent)--a nonantiseptic liquid soap (control), an antiseptic hand rinse containing 60% isopropyl alcohol (IPA) with emollients (Alc A), an antiseptic hand rinse containing 70% IPA and 0.5% chlorhexidine gluconate with emollients (Alc B), an antiseptic containing 4% chlorhexidine gluconate and 4% IPA (CHG), and 70% IPA--washed their hands 15 times per day for 5 days under supervision by using a standardized technique and measured amounts of test agent. Microbiologic samples of hand flora were obtained at base line and after hand washes 1 and 15 on test days 1 and 5. After the initial hand wash there were significant reductions over base line in aerobic and anaerobic log CFU among those using Alc A, CHG, and IPA. By the end of the first day of hand washing (15 washes), there were 2-log or greater reductions in aerobic counts among subjects using all antiseptics, but no significant reductions in controls. By the end of day 5, all agents produced significant reductions in aerobic (P = 0.0002) and anaerobic (P = 0.002) counts over control soap. Subject assessment of effects of hand washing on the skin and overall satisfaction varied significantly by product (P = 0.04 and 0.05, respectively). We conclude that alcohol-based hand rinses are highly efficacious, and such products are recommended as a health care personnel hand wash, particularly when sink and running water are inaccessible.

Physiologic and microbiologic changes in skin related to frequent handwashing.

Handwashing practices may be adversely influenced by the detrimental effects of handwashing on skin. A protocol was developed to assess the physiologic and microbiologic effects of frequent handwashing. Fifty-two female volunteers washed their hands 24 times per day for 5 days. Five agents were tested: water alone, non-medicated bar soap, a chlorhexidine-containing antiseptic, and two agents containing povidone-iodine (one currently available on the market and one being tested for possible marketing). Some damage to the outer membrane of skin, the stratum corneum, occurred in all groups. There were significant changes in the amount of evaporation water loss (p = .001) and in self assessments of skin condition (p = .005) from pre-to-post test for the entire group. Skin damage was also assessed by visualizing desquamating stratum corneum cells, which are shed in large aggregates when detergents injure skin. Significantly less such shedding occurred in subjects using water alone, bar soap, and the chlorhexidine formulation (p = .02). Greater antimicrobial activity of an agent was not correlated with increased skin trauma. We have quantitated, using objective physiologic parameter, the skin damage that occurs during even a short period of frequent handwashing. We recommend that further studies using the methods described be conducted to quantitate skin damage over longer periods of time, more closely resembling handwashing practices of health care personnel.

Effect of Hand Washing for Special part and its Improvement

Effect of Hand Washing for Special part and its Improvement

Effectiveness of hand washing and disinfection methods in removing transient bacteria after patient nursing.

The effectiveness of various hand washing and disinfection methods in removing transient skin bacteria was studied in hospital after dry or moist contamination of the hands when nursing burn patients. The results were compared with those of laboratory tests with volunteers. A fairly good correlation of the bacterial reductions existed between hospital and laboratory tests. All other methods removed Staph. aureus from the hands more effectively than liquid soap. Gram-negative bacilli were more easily removed than staphylococci, even with soap wash alone. In hospital, none of the washing and disinfection methods always removed all patient-borne bacteria from the hands. After dry or moist contamination and subsequent washing with soap only, colonies of Staph. aureus were often detected in finger-print samples. Staphylococci were more often completely removed by a 4% chlorhexidine detergent scrub and alcoholic solutions (either with or without previous soap wash) than by liquid soap, hexachlorophene or iodophor preparations. Gram-negative bacilli were more easily removed by all the washing and disinfection methods. After moist contamination, Gram-negative bacilli were more often completely removed from the hands by ethanol than by other treatments. The results of the present study emphasize the importance of always using gloves when nursing a profuse spreader of bacteria or one who must be protected from infection.

Transmission of staphylococci between newborns. Importance of the hands to personnel.

Previous studies 1 of the transmission of staphylococci to newborn infants suggested that organisms on the hands of personnel carriers are more important than organisms expelled into the air from the respiratory tracts of such carriers. In addition, these studies provided evidence which indicates that the air is not a major route of spread of organisms between infants. The fact that organisms nonetheless do spread readily from one infant to another suggests that the hands of personnel may play a role in the transport of staphylococci between infants. The present studies were designed to test the effectiveness of handwashing by nursery personnel in preventing the spread of organisms between infants and thus to provide indirect evidence regarding the importance of this mode of spread. In addition, an attempt was made to test the role of the airborne route in the transmission of staphylococci among newborns. In order to provide results