This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kampf, G.
Right arrow Articles by Kramer, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kampf, G.
Right arrow Articles by Kramer, A.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Clinical Microbiology Reviews, October 2004, p. 863-893, Vol. 17, No. 4
0893-8512/04/$08.00+0     DOI: 10.1128/CMR.17.4.863-893.2004
Copyright © 2004, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Epidemiologic Background of Hand Hygiene and Evaluation of the Most Important Agents for Scrubs and Rubs

Günter Kampf1,2* and Axel Kramer2

Bode Chemie GmbH & Co., Scientific Affairs, Hamburg,1 Institut für Hygiene und Umweltmedizin, Ernst-Moritz-Arndt Universität, Greifswald, Germany2

The etiology of nosocomial infections, the frequency of contaminated hands with the different nosocomial pathogens, and the role of health care workers' hands during outbreaks suggest that a hand hygiene preparation should at least have activity against bacteria, yeasts, and coated viruses. The importance of efficacy in choosing the right hand hygiene product is reflected in the new Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guideline on hand hygiene (J. M. Boyce and D. Pittet, Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep. 51:1-45, 2002). The best antimicrobial efficacy can be achieved with ethanol (60 to 85%), isopropanol (60 to 80%), and n-propanol (60 to 80%). The activity is broad and immediate. Ethanol at high concentrations (e.g., 95%) is the most effective treatment against naked viruses, whereas n-propanol seems to be more effective against the resident bacterial flora. The combination of alcohols may have a synergistic effect. The antimicrobial efficacy of chlorhexidine (2 to 4%) and triclosan (1 to 2%) is both lower and slower. Additionally, both agents have a risk of bacterial resistance, which is higher for chlorhexidine than triclosan. Their activity is often supported by the mechanical removal of pathogens during hand washing. Taking the antimicrobial efficacy and the mechanical removal together, they are still less effective than the alcohols. Plain soap and water has the lowest efficacy of all. In the new Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guideline, promotion of alcohol-based hand rubs containing various emollients instead of irritating soaps and detergents is one strategy to reduce skin damage, dryness, and irritation. Irritant contact dermatitis is highest with preparations containing 4% chlorhexidine gluconate, less frequent with nonantimicrobial soaps and preparations containing lower concentrations of chlorhexidine gluconate, and lowest with well-formulated alcohol-based hand rubs containing emollients and other skin conditioners. Too few published data from comparative trials are available to reliably rank triclosan. Personnel should be reminded that it is neither necessary nor recommended to routinely wash hands after each application of an alcohol-based hand rub. Long-lasting improvement of compliance with hand hygiene protocols can be successful if an effective and accessible alcohol-based hand rub with a proven dermal tolerance and an excellent user acceptability is supplied, accompanied by education of health care workers and promotion of the use of the product.

* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Bode Chemie GmbH & Co., Scientific Affairs, Melanchthonstraße 27, 22525 Hamburg, Germany. Phone: 49 40 54006-0. Fax: 49 40 54006-128. E-mail: guenter.kampf{at}bode-chemie.de.

Clinical Microbiology Reviews, October 2004, p. 863-893, Vol. 17, No. 4
0893-8512/04/$08.00+0     DOI: 10.1128/CMR.17.4.863-893.2004
Copyright © 2004, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.



This article has been cited by other articles:

  • Pickering, A. J., Boehm, A. B., Mwanjali, M., Davis, J. (2010). Efficacy of Waterless Hand Hygiene Compared with Handwashing with Soap: A Field Study in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Am J Trop Med Hyg 82: 270-278 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Liu, P., Yuen, Y., Hsiao, H.-M., Jaykus, L.-A., Moe, C. (2010). Effectiveness of Liquid Soap and Hand Sanitizer against Norwalk Virus on Contaminated Hands. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 76: 394-399 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Reichel, M., Heisig, P., Kohlmann, T., Kampf, G. (2009). Alcohols for Skin Antisepsis at Clinically Relevant Skin Sites. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 53: 4778-4782 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Miller, M. J., Walsh, M. R., Shrake, J. L., Dukes, R. E., Hill, D. B. (2009). Evaluation of the BioVigilant IMD-A, a novel optical spectroscopy technology for the continuous and real-time environmental monitoring of viable and nonviable particles. Part II. Case studies in environmental monitoring during aseptic filling, intervention assessments, and glove integrity testing in manufacturing isolators.. PDA J Pharm Sci Technol 63: 259-283 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Edwards, J., Patel, G., Wareham, D. W. (2007). Low concentrations of commercial alcohol hand rubs facilitate growth of and secretion of extracellular proteins by multidrug-resistant strains of Acinetobacter baumannii. J Med Microbiol 56: 1595-1599 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Wong, M.-S., Chu, W.-C., Sun, D.-S., Huang, H.-S., Chen, J.-H., Tsai, P.-J., Lin, N.-T., Yu, M.-S., Hsu, S.-F., Wang, S.-L., Chang, H.-H. (2006). Visible-Light-Induced Bactericidal Activity of a Nitrogen-Doped Titanium Photocatalyst against Human Pathogens. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 72: 6111-6116 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Mukherjee, P. K., Mohamed, S., Chandra, J., Kuhn, D., Liu, S., Antar, O. S., Munyon, R., Mitchell, A. P., Andes, D., Chance, M. R., Rouabhia, M., Ghannoum, M. A. (2006). Alcohol Dehydrogenase Restricts the Ability of the Pathogen Candida albicans To Form a Biofilm on Catheter Surfaces through an Ethanol-Based Mechanism. Infect. Immun. 74: 3804-3816 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Kampf, G., Ostermeyer, C., Heeg, P., Paulson, D. (2006). Evaluation of two methods of determining the efficacies of two alcohol-based hand rubs for surgical hand antisepsis.. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 72: 3856-3861 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Poole, K. (2005). Efflux-mediated antimicrobial resistance. J Antimicrob Chemother 56: 20-51 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Larson, E. L., Cimiotti, J., Haas, J., Parides, M., Nesin, M., Della-Latta, P., Saiman, L. (2005). Effect of Antiseptic Handwashing vs Alcohol Sanitizer on Health Care-Associated Infections in Neonatal Intensive Care Units. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 159: 377-383 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Kampf, G., Ostermeyer, C. (2004). Influence of Applied Volume on Efficacy of 3-Minute Surgical Reference Disinfection Method prEN 12791. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 70: 7066-7069 [Abstract] [Full Text]  


Copyright © 2010 by the American Society for Microbiology.   For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»