An evaluation of five protocols for surgical handwashing in relation to skin condition and microbial counts.
Five protocols for surgical handwashing (scrubbing) were evaluated for their efficiency of removal of micro-organisms and their drying effect on the skin. The scrubbing protocols tested were: (1) an initial scrub of 5 min and consecutive scrubs of 3.5 min with chlorhexidine gluconate 4% (CHG-5); (2) an initial scrub of 3 min and consecutive scrubs of 2.5 min with chlorhexidine gluconate 4% (CHG-3); (3) an initial scrub of 3 min and consecutive scrubs of 2.5 min with povidone iodine 5% and triclosan 1% (PI-3); (4) an initial scrub of 2 min with chlorhexidine gluconate 4% followed by a 30 s application of isopropanol 70% and chlorhexidine gluconate 0.5%, and a 30 s application of isopropanol 70% and chlorhexidine gluconate 0.5% for consecutive scrubs (IPA); and (5) an initial scrub of 2 min with chlorhexidine gluconate 4% followed by a 30 s application of ethanol 70% and chlorhexidine gluconate 0.5%, and a 30 s application of ethanol 70% and chlorhexidine gluconate 0.5% for consecutive scrubs (EA). A convenience sample of 23 operating theatre nurses completed each scrub protocol for one week in a randomized order. A week of normal work activities intervened between each protocol. Subjects were assessed before commencing and after completing the week of each protocol to determine changes in the microbial counts and skin condition of the hands. Specimens for microbial analysis were collected before, immediately after and 2 h after an initial scrub, and 2 h after a consecutive scrub. The CHG-5, CHG-3 and PI-3 protocols, which used detergent-based antiseptics only, were compared with protocols incorporating an alcohol-based antiseptic (IPA and EA). The protocols incorporating alcohol-based antiseptics and the CHG-5 protocol were generally associated with the lowest post-scrub numbers of colony forming units (cfu). No difference between the CHG-5 protocol and the alcohol-based antiseptics was found at the beginning of the test week, but after exclusive use of the respective protocols for a week, the alcohol-based antiseptics were associated with significantly lower cfu numbers in two out of the three post-scrub samples (P = 0.003, P = 0.035). Although virtually no statistically significant differences in skin condition were found, many subjects reported the alcohol-based antiseptic protocols to be less drying on the skin. The findings of this study support the proposition that a scrub protocol using alcohol-based antiseptics is as effective and no more damaging to skin than more time-consuming, conventional methods using detergent-based antiseptics.
Pereira
L J
LJ
Department of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Sydney, Australia.
Lee
G M
GM
Wade
K J
KJ
D000433:1-Propanol / Q000008:administration & dosage*; D000279:Administration, Cutaneous; D000891:Anti-Infective Agents, Local / Q000008:administration & dosage*; D002710:Chlorhexidine / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000031:analogs & derivatives*; D002985:Clinical Protocols; D015169:Colony Count, Microbial; D000431:Ethanol / Q000008:administration & dosage*; D006225:Hand / Q000382:microbiology*; D006235:Hand Disinfection / Q000379:methods*; D006801:Humans; D009741:Nursing Staff, Hospital; D011206:Povidone-Iodine / Q000008:administration & dosage*; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D013997:Time Factors
D000891:Anti-Infective Agents, Local; D000431:Ethanol; D011206:Povidone-Iodine; D000433:1-Propanol; C010882:chlorhexidine gluconate; D002710:Chlorhexidine