Osorio CL, Hernández SEA, Fajardo VR, Torres SE, Mejía BG, Anaya FV, Ángeles GU

Language: Spanish
References: 26
Page: 205-210
PDF size: 206.19 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Objective: to compare effectiveness between handwashing and frotation with glycerinated alcohol in healthcare workers.
Material and methods: we conducted a comparative assay between effectiveness of handwashing and glycerinated alcohol in healthcare workers in a study applied during two time periods of time to evaluate colony formation units (CFU) taken from 18 healthcare workers such as physicians, nurses, food workers, and laboratory technicians. This was carried out prior to and after handwashing techini-que was carried out. Number of samples was 72, divided into two time periods. Our objective during the first period was to obtain previous and subsequent data control of routine handwashing, while during the second time period our objective was to obtain results concerning effectiveness of ethyl alcohol and glycerine at 5 % with the same subjects and methodology as previously mentioned.
Results: in both methods, we observed reduction of CFU logarithm of transitory and resident flora. In the first method, CFU was 0.5 logarithm₁₀ . Using glycerinated alcohol, there was a reduction of 1.5 log₁₀ , showing that this was more effective in reduction of CFU by cm² .
Discussion: Results registered showed that hospital healthcare workers applied an adequate process; nonetheless, we suggest that the hand- washing technique should be used as a basic technique. Glycerinated alcohol is a method that affords healthcare workers trustworthiness with regard to diminution of bacterial count.

REFERENCES

1. 1. Herruzo CR, García CJ, Fernández AMJ. A new alcohol solution (n-duopropenide) for hygienic (or routine) hand disinfection is more useful than handwashing: in vitro and vivo studies in burn and other intensive care units. Burns 2001;27:747-752.

2. 2. Harris AD, Samoret RM, Dirosario K. A survey on handwashing practices and opinions of healthcare workers. J Hosp Infect 2000;45:318-321.

3. 3. Pittet D, Hugonnet S, Harbarth S, Mourouga P, Sauvan V. Effectiveness of a hospital-wide programmed to improve compliance unit hand hygiene. Lancet 2000;356:1307-1312.

4. 4. Mcguckin M, Waterman R, Storr J. Evaluation of a patient-empowering hand hygiene programmed in the UK. J Hosp Infect 2001;48:222-227.

5. 5. Lucet C, Rigaud MP, Mentre F, Kassis F, Deblangy G. Hand contamination before and after different hand hygiene techniques: a randomized clinical trial. J Hosp Infect 2002;50:276-280.

6. 6. Kampf G, Ostermeyer C. Inter-laboratory repro-ducibility of the hand disinfections reference procedures of EN 1500. J Hosp Infect 2003;53:304-306.

7. 7. Colombo C, Giger H, Grote J, Desplazes C, Plets-cher C. Impact of teaching interventions on nurse compliance with hand disinfections. J Hosp Infect 2002; 51:69-72.

8. 8. Kramer A, Rudolph P, Kampf G, Pittet D. Limited efficacy of alcohol-based hand gels. Lancet 2002; 359:1489-1490.

9. 9. Kampf G, Ostermeyer C. Intra-laboratory repro-ducibility of the hand hygiene reference procedures of EN 1499 (hygienic hand wash) and EN 1500 (hygienic hand disinfections). J Hosp Infect 2002;52:219-224.

10. Gopal G, Jeanes A, Osman M, Aylott C, Green J. Marketing hand hygiene in hospitals a case study. J Hosp Infect 2002;50:42-47.

11. Feather A, Stone SP, Wessier A, Boursicot KA, Pratt C. Now please wash your hands: the hands washing behaviour of final mbbs candidates. J Hosp Infect 2002;45:62-64.

12. Toshima Y, Ojima M, Yamada H, Mori M, Tonomura M, Hioki Y. Observation of everyday handwashing behaviour of Japanese, and effects of antibacterial soap. I. J Food Microbiol 2001;68:83-91.

13. Avilés RD, Eusebio HG. Análisis bacteriológico del equipo para controlar la eficacia del saneamiento. Manual de Laboratorio de Microbiología Sanitaria. Segunda edición. Escuela Nacional de Ciencias Biológicas, IPN; 1993. p. 92-99.

14. Jones RD, Jampani H, Mulberry G, Rizer RL. Mois-turizing alcohol hand gels for surgical hand pre-paration. J Hosp Infect 2000;71(3):584-587, 589-590, 592.

15. Montville R, Chen Y, Schaffner DW. Risk assess-ments of hand washing efficacy using literature and experimental data. I. J Food Microbiol 2002;73:305- 313.

16. Naikoba S, Hayward A. The effectiveness of inter-ventions aimed at increasing hand washing in health-care workers-a systematic review. J Hosp Infect 2001; 47:173-180.

17. Norma Oficial Mexicana. Bienes y servicios. Preparación de alimentos que se ofrecen en estable-cimientos fijos. Especificaciones sanitarias. Cédula de verificación. NOM-093-SSA1-1994.

18. Kampf G, Kapella M. Suitability of sterillium gel for surgical hand disinfections. J Hosp Infect 2003; 54:222-225.

19. Barrau K, Rovery C, Drancourt M, Brouqui P. Hand antisepsis: evaluation of a sprayer system for alcohol distribution. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2003; 24(3): 180-183.

20. Hansen TB, Knochel S. Image analysis method for evaluation of specific and non-specific hand contamination. J APPL Microbiol 2003;94(3):483-494.

21. John MJ. Hand hygiene: washing and disinfections. Can Dent Assoc 2000;66(10):546-547.

22. Hirshmann H, Fux L, Podusel J, Schindler K, Kundi M, Rotter M. The influence of hand hygiene prior to insertion of peripheral venous catheters on the frequency of complications. J Hosp Infect 2001;49: 199-203.

23. Manfred LR. Hand washing and hand disinfections. Organization and implementation of infection control programs. 2001;79:1052- 1058.

24. Charbonneau DL, Ponte JM, Kochanowski BA. A Method of assessing the efficacy of hand sanitizer: use of real soil encountered in the food service industry. J Food Prot 2000;63(4):495-501.

25. Boyce MJ, Pittet D. Guideline for hand hygienic in health-care seating: recommendation of the health-care infection control practices advisory. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2002;23:12.

26. Mejía A, Fajardo G, Gómez D, et al. El tamaño de la muestra: un enfoque práctico en la investigación clínica pediátrica. Bol Med Hosp Infant Mex 1995; 52(6):381-391.