No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Factors Influencing Field Testing of Alcohol-Based Hand Rubs
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 29 December 2014
Abstract
BACKGROUND
According to the World Health Organization guidelines, field tests, in the context of a bid for the supply of alcohol-based hand rubs, should take into account climatic region, test period, products already in use, and type of use (hygienic or surgical) when assessing tolerance. This laborious method is often contested.
OBJECTIVE
To conduct a post hoc analysis of the data of a large bid, including 5 factors, to validate the relevance of their inclusion.
METHODS
For the purposes of the bid, products were compared in terms of the 4 World Health Organization tolerance criteria (appearance, intactness, moisture content, sensation) during product testing and were separated into groups on the basis of the studied factors. The post hoc analysis method included (1) comparison of the mean before-and-after difference based on the self-evaluation of the skin with the 4 World Health Organization tolerance criteria, between climatic regions, periods, products in use, test product, and the type of use; (2) generalized linear models, taking into account all studied factors.
RESULTS
The analysis included data for 1,925 pairs of professionals. The means of the differences observed were independently and significantly associated with the test period (P<.001), the hygienic or surgical use (P=.010 to .041, not significant for appearance), the product already in use (significant for appearance P=.021), and the test product (P<.001). The association with climatic region was found to be significant only in the nonadjusted analysis.
CONCLUSION
The type of use, the test period, and the product in use should be taken into account when designing field tests of alcohol-based hand rubs.
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2014;00(0): 1–9
- Type
- Original Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- © 2014 by The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America. All rights reserved
References
REFERENCES
1.Kramer, A, Bernig, T, Kampf, G. Clinical double-blind trial on the dermal tolerance and user acceptability of six alcohol-based hand disinfectants for hygienic hand disinfection. J Hosp Infect 2002;51:114–120.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Pittet, D, Allegranzi, B, Sax, H, Chraiti, MN, Griffiths, W, Richet, H. Double-blind, randomized, crossover trial of 3 hand rub formulations: fast-track evaluation of tolerability and acceptability. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2007;28:1344–1351.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Rotter, ML, Koller, W, Neumann, R. The influence of cosmetic additives on the acceptability of alcohol-based hand disinfectants. J Hosp Infect 1991;18(Suppl B):57–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Rohr, M, Schrader, K. Climatic influence on cosmetic skin parameters. Curr Probl Dermatol 1998;26:151–164.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Uter, W, Gefeller, O, Schwanitz, HJ. An epidemiological study of the influence of season (cold and dry air) on the occurrence of irritant skin changes of the hands. Br J Dermatol 1998;138:266–272.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Girard, R, Bousquet, E, Carre, E, et al. Tolerance and acceptability of 14 surgical and hygienic alcohol-based hand rubs. J Hosp Infect 2006;63:281–288.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Larson, E, Girard, R, Pessoa-Silva, CL, Boyce, J, Donaldson, L, Pittet, D. Skin reactions related to hand hygiene and selection of hand hygiene products. Am J Infect Control 2006;34:627–635.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Girard, R, Carre, E, Pires-Cronenberger, S, et al. Field test comparison of two dermal tolerance assessment methods of hand hygiene products. J Hosp Infect 2008;69:181–185.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Stauffer, F, Griess, M, Pleininger, G, Zhumadilova, A, Assadian, O. Acceptability and tolerability of liquid versus gel and standard versus virucidal alcohol-based hand rub formulations among dental students. Am J Infect Control 2013;41:1007–1011.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Kanerva, L, Estlander, T, Jolanki, R. Occupational allergic contact dermatitis from alkylammonium amidobenzoate. Eur J Dermatol 2001;11:240–243.Google ScholarPubMed
11.Dhir, H. Hand dermatitis and nail disorders of the workplace. Clin Occup Environ Med 2006;5:381–396.Google ScholarPubMed
12.Wesley, NO, Maibach, HI. Decreasing allergic contact dermatitis frequency through dermatotoxicologic and epidemiologic based intervention? Food Chem Toxicol 2003;41:857–860.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13.Wong, CSM, Beck, MH. Allergic contact dermatitis from triclosan in antibacterial handwashes. Contact Dermatitis 2001;45:307.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14.Pittet, D, Allegranzi, B, Boyce, J. The World Health Organization Guidelines on Hand Hygiene in Health Care and their consensus recommendations. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2009;30:611–622.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15.Boyce, JM, Kelliher, S, Vallande, N. Skin irritation and dryness associated with two hand-hygiene regimens: soap-and-water hand washing versus hand antisepsis with an alcoholic hand gel. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2000;21:442–448.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16.Larson, EL, Aiello, AE, Bastyr, J, et al. Assessment of two hand hygiene regimens for intensive care unit personnel. Crit Care Med 2001;29:944–951.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17.Chamorey, E, Marcy, PY, Dandine, M, et al. A prospective multicenter study evaluating skin tolerance to standard hand hygiene techniques. Am J Infect Control 2011;39:6–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18.Larson, E, McGinley, KJ, Grove, GL, Leyden, JJ, Talbot, GH. Physiologic, microbiologic, and seasonal effects of handwashing on the skin of health care personnel. Am J Infect Control 1986;14:51–59.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19.Visscher, MO, Randall Wickett, R. Hand hygiene compliance and irritant dermatitis: a juxtaposition of healthcare issues. Int J Cosmet Sci 2012;34:402–415.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed