• Wounds · Dec 2015

    Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study

    Randomized Controlled Trial of Antiseptic Hand Hygiene Methods in an Outpatient Surgery Clinic.

    • Paul J Therattil, Janet H Yueh, Anthony M Kordahi, Deepa V Cherla, Edward S Lee, and Mark S Granick.
    • Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ.
    • Wounds. 2015 Dec 1; 27 (12): 347-53.

    IntroductionOutpatient wound care plays an integral part in any plastic surgery practice. However, compliance with hand hygiene measures has shown to be low, due to skin irritation and lack of time. The objective of this trial was to determine whether single-use, long-acting antiseptics can be as effective as standard multiple-use hand hygiene methods in an outpatient surgical setting.Materials And MethodsA prospective, randomized controlled trial was performed in the authors' outpatient plastic surgery clinic at Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ to compare the efficacy of an ethyl alcohol-based sanitizer (Avagard D Instant Hand Aniseptic, 3M Health Care, St. Paul, MN), a benzalkonium chloride-based sanitizer (Soft & Shield, Bioderm Technologies, Inc, Trenton, NJ, distributed by NAPP Technologies, Hackensack, NJ ), and soap and- water handwashing. Subjects included clinic personnel, who were followed throughout the course of a 3-hour clinic session with hourly hand bacterial counts taken.ResultsDuring the course of the trial, 95 subjects completed the clinic session utilizing 1 of the hand hygiene methods (36 ethyl alcohol-based sanitizer, 38 benzalkonium chloride-based sanitizer, and 21 soap-and-water handwashing). There was no difference between hand bacterial counts using the different methods at 4 hourly time points (P greater than 0.05). Hand bacterial counts increased significantly over the 3-hour clinic session with the ethyl alcohol-based sanitizer (9.24 to 21.90 CFU, P less than 0.05), benzalkonium chloride-based sanitizer (6.69 to 21.59 CFU, P less than 0.05), and soap-and-water handwashing (8.43 to 22.75 CFU, P less than 0.05).ConclusionThere does not appear to be any difference in efficacy between single-use, long-acting sanitizer, and standard multiple-use hand hygiene methods. Hand bacterial counts increased significantly over the course of the 3-hour clinic session regardless of the hand hygiene measure used. Hand condition of subjects was improved with the ethyl alcohol-based sanitizer and the benzalkonium chloride-based sanitizer compared with soap-and-water handwashing.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.