Research for infection protection
  • germs
  • Adenovirus
  • Aspergillus niger
  • Bovine virus diarrhea
  • Clostridium difficile
  • Candida albicans
  • Candida albicans
  • Coronavirus
  • Corynebacterium
  • Escherichia coli
  • Helicobacter pylori

Author: Kampf G et al. Source: Source: American Journal of Infection Control 41 (2013) e1-5

STUDY

Kampf G et al.

Efficacy of surgical hand scrub products based on chlorhexidine is largely overestimated without neutralizing agents in the sampling fluid

Background: Surgical hand antiseptics often contain chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG). There are doubts that the measured effect of these products is only obtained on hands or in addition after sampling because of a lack of valid neutralizing agents (NAs) in the sampling fluid.


Methods: The efficacy of Avagard CHG and Hibiclens was measured for 11 applications over 5 days according to the manufacturers’ instructions. NAs were added to the sampling fluid and the dilution fluid (group 1) or to just the dilution fluid (group 2). In a third group, NAs were added to the dilution fluid only and cream was applied after the final scrub on days 1–4. Neutralization was validated according to ASTM 1054 using Staphylococcus epidermidis.


Results: When NAs were not added to the sampling fluid, both products were very effective, with a mean log10 reduction in flora of 3.32 ± 0.53 for Avagard CHG and 3.68 ± 0.52 for Hibiclens on day 5. When NAs were included in the sampling fluid, however, the immediate efficacy was significantly lower, at 2.75 ± 0.55 and 3.14 ± 0.50, respectively. A lack of NAs in the sampling fluid resulted in overestimation of efficacy by a factor of between 0.3 and 1.1 log10.


Conclusions: Efficacy studies carried out without NAs in the sampling fluid for products with CHG should be critically assessed.


Source:
American Journal of Infection Control 41 (2013) e1-5


Please click here to view the original study.