Evaluation of donor skin disinfection methods
BACKGROUND: Because most bacteria isolated from contaminated platelet concentrates are thought to originate from the donor's skin, the efficacy of four methods of skin disinfection was compared. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Contact plates were used for antecubital skin cultures after they were dem...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Transfusion (Philadelphia, Pa.) Pa.), 1997-03, Vol.37 (3), p.309-312 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 312 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 309 |
| container_title | Transfusion (Philadelphia, Pa.) |
| container_volume | 37 |
| creator | Goldman, M. Roy, G. Fréchette, N. Décary, F. Massicotte, L. Delage, G. |
| description | BACKGROUND: Because most bacteria isolated from contaminated platelet concentrates are thought to originate from the donor's skin, the efficacy of four methods of skin disinfection was compared.
STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Contact plates were used for antecubital skin cultures after they were demonstrated to be easier to use and at least as sensitive as a swab system. One antecubital fossa of each subject was disinfected by a standard method, the use of a povidone‐iodine swabstick containing 0.75‐percent available iodine followed by the use of a povidone‐iodine swabstick containing 1‐percent available iodine. The other arm was disinfected with either a 70‐percent isopropyl alcohol scrub followed by an ampoule of 2‐percent iodine tincture (Group 1; n = 126); a green‐soap sponge followed by a 70‐percent isopropyl alcohol swab, used for donors who are allergic to iodine (Group 2; n = 30); or a 0.5‐percent chlorhexidine gluconate and 70‐percent isopropyl alcohol sponge followed by an ampoule of 0.5‐percent chlorhexidine gluconate and 70‐percent isopropyl alcohol (Group 3; n = 40). Contact plate cultures were done before and after disinfection, and colonies counted after a 48‐hour 37°C incubation period.
RESULTS: Similar numbers of bacteria grew from both antecubital fossae of the same subject before disinfection (p = 0.71). Compared to the standard povidoneiodine method, isopropyl alcohol and tincture of iodine resulted in significantly less bacterial growth (p |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1046/j.1537-2995.1997.37397240214.x |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_78928971</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>78928971</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5158-6cd5a0b2279eaee5259055301b2dff4cdbe2d12ab2d9d6a43ce1fce1524a034a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqVkE9LwzAYh4Moc04_grCD7NaaN2ma5SLI3B9hKshk4CVkSYrZunY2m27f3tSN4dVDSMLvye8ND0IdwDHgJL2dx8Aoj4gQLAYheEw5FZwkmEASb09Q8xifoibGCUQAlJyjC-_nGGMiMDRQQwAJJ9ZEUf9L5Ru1dmXRLrO2KYuyavuFK9rGeVdkVv9GS7v-KI2_RGeZyr29Ouwt9DboT3qjaPwyfOzdjyPNgHWjVBum8IwQLqyylhEWZjGKYUZMliXazCwxQFS4CpOqhGoLWViMJArTRNEW6ux7V1X5ubF-LZfOa5vnqrDlxkveFaQrOATwbg_qqvS-splcVW6pqp0ELGtfci5rIbIWImtf8o8vuQ0F14dJm9nSmuPzg6CQ3xxy5bXKs0oV2vkjRlJIgaUB6-2xb5fb3T8_ISevgxTzbmiJ9i3Or-322KKqhUw55UxOn4eSPpDJdPo0ku_0B86Hlr4</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>78928971</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Evaluation of donor skin disinfection methods</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library All Journals</source><creator>Goldman, M. ; Roy, G. ; Fréchette, N. ; Décary, F. ; Massicotte, L. ; Delage, G.</creator><creatorcontrib>Goldman, M. ; Roy, G. ; Fréchette, N. ; Décary, F. ; Massicotte, L. ; Delage, G.</creatorcontrib><description>BACKGROUND: Because most bacteria isolated from contaminated platelet concentrates are thought to originate from the donor's skin, the efficacy of four methods of skin disinfection was compared.
STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Contact plates were used for antecubital skin cultures after they were demonstrated to be easier to use and at least as sensitive as a swab system. One antecubital fossa of each subject was disinfected by a standard method, the use of a povidone‐iodine swabstick containing 0.75‐percent available iodine followed by the use of a povidone‐iodine swabstick containing 1‐percent available iodine. The other arm was disinfected with either a 70‐percent isopropyl alcohol scrub followed by an ampoule of 2‐percent iodine tincture (Group 1; n = 126); a green‐soap sponge followed by a 70‐percent isopropyl alcohol swab, used for donors who are allergic to iodine (Group 2; n = 30); or a 0.5‐percent chlorhexidine gluconate and 70‐percent isopropyl alcohol sponge followed by an ampoule of 0.5‐percent chlorhexidine gluconate and 70‐percent isopropyl alcohol (Group 3; n = 40). Contact plate cultures were done before and after disinfection, and colonies counted after a 48‐hour 37°C incubation period.
RESULTS: Similar numbers of bacteria grew from both antecubital fossae of the same subject before disinfection (p = 0.71). Compared to the standard povidoneiodine method, isopropyl alcohol and tincture of iodine resulted in significantly less bacterial growth (p<0.001), the green soap and isopropyl alcohol method resulted in significantly more bacterial growth (p<0.001), and the chlorhexidine gluconate and isopropyl alcohol method resulted in similar amounts of bacterial growth (p>0.3).
CONCLUSION: Isopropyl alcohol scrub followed by iodine tincture is more efficacious than povidone‐iodine as measured by contact plate cultures. For donors who are allergic to iodine, chlorhexidine gluconate and isopropyl alcohol is more efficacious than green soap and isopropyl alcohol.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0041-1132</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1537-2995</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1046/j.1537-2995.1997.37397240214.x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 9122905</identifier><identifier>CODEN: TRANAT</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>1-Propanol - pharmacology ; Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy ; Anti-Infective Agents, Local - pharmacology ; Bacteria - drug effects ; Bacteria - growth & development ; Bacteria - isolation & purification ; Biological and medical sciences ; Blood. Blood and plasma substitutes. Blood products. Blood cells. Blood typing. Plasmapheresis. Apheresis ; Colony Count, Microbial ; Evaluation Studies as Topic ; Humans ; Iodine - pharmacology ; Medical sciences ; Phlebotomy ; Povidone-Iodine - pharmacology ; Skin - microbiology ; Transfusions. Complications. Transfusion reactions. Cell and gene therapy</subject><ispartof>Transfusion (Philadelphia, Pa.), 1997-03, Vol.37 (3), p.309-312</ispartof><rights>1997 AABB</rights><rights>1997 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5158-6cd5a0b2279eaee5259055301b2dff4cdbe2d12ab2d9d6a43ce1fce1524a034a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c5158-6cd5a0b2279eaee5259055301b2dff4cdbe2d12ab2d9d6a43ce1fce1524a034a3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1046%2Fj.1537-2995.1997.37397240214.x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1046%2Fj.1537-2995.1997.37397240214.x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1416,27923,27924,45573,45574</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=2616156$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9122905$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Goldman, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roy, G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fréchette, N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Décary, F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Massicotte, L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Delage, G.</creatorcontrib><title>Evaluation of donor skin disinfection methods</title><title>Transfusion (Philadelphia, Pa.)</title><addtitle>Transfusion</addtitle><description>BACKGROUND: Because most bacteria isolated from contaminated platelet concentrates are thought to originate from the donor's skin, the efficacy of four methods of skin disinfection was compared.
STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Contact plates were used for antecubital skin cultures after they were demonstrated to be easier to use and at least as sensitive as a swab system. One antecubital fossa of each subject was disinfected by a standard method, the use of a povidone‐iodine swabstick containing 0.75‐percent available iodine followed by the use of a povidone‐iodine swabstick containing 1‐percent available iodine. The other arm was disinfected with either a 70‐percent isopropyl alcohol scrub followed by an ampoule of 2‐percent iodine tincture (Group 1; n = 126); a green‐soap sponge followed by a 70‐percent isopropyl alcohol swab, used for donors who are allergic to iodine (Group 2; n = 30); or a 0.5‐percent chlorhexidine gluconate and 70‐percent isopropyl alcohol sponge followed by an ampoule of 0.5‐percent chlorhexidine gluconate and 70‐percent isopropyl alcohol (Group 3; n = 40). Contact plate cultures were done before and after disinfection, and colonies counted after a 48‐hour 37°C incubation period.
RESULTS: Similar numbers of bacteria grew from both antecubital fossae of the same subject before disinfection (p = 0.71). Compared to the standard povidoneiodine method, isopropyl alcohol and tincture of iodine resulted in significantly less bacterial growth (p<0.001), the green soap and isopropyl alcohol method resulted in significantly more bacterial growth (p<0.001), and the chlorhexidine gluconate and isopropyl alcohol method resulted in similar amounts of bacterial growth (p>0.3).
CONCLUSION: Isopropyl alcohol scrub followed by iodine tincture is more efficacious than povidone‐iodine as measured by contact plate cultures. For donors who are allergic to iodine, chlorhexidine gluconate and isopropyl alcohol is more efficacious than green soap and isopropyl alcohol.</description><subject>1-Propanol - pharmacology</subject><subject>Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy</subject><subject>Anti-Infective Agents, Local - pharmacology</subject><subject>Bacteria - drug effects</subject><subject>Bacteria - growth & development</subject><subject>Bacteria - isolation & purification</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Blood. Blood and plasma substitutes. Blood products. Blood cells. Blood typing. Plasmapheresis. Apheresis</subject><subject>Colony Count, Microbial</subject><subject>Evaluation Studies as Topic</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Iodine - pharmacology</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Phlebotomy</subject><subject>Povidone-Iodine - pharmacology</subject><subject>Skin - microbiology</subject><subject>Transfusions. Complications. Transfusion reactions. Cell and gene therapy</subject><issn>0041-1132</issn><issn>1537-2995</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1997</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqVkE9LwzAYh4Moc04_grCD7NaaN2ma5SLI3B9hKshk4CVkSYrZunY2m27f3tSN4dVDSMLvye8ND0IdwDHgJL2dx8Aoj4gQLAYheEw5FZwkmEASb09Q8xifoibGCUQAlJyjC-_nGGMiMDRQQwAJJ9ZEUf9L5Ru1dmXRLrO2KYuyavuFK9rGeVdkVv9GS7v-KI2_RGeZyr29Ouwt9DboT3qjaPwyfOzdjyPNgHWjVBum8IwQLqyylhEWZjGKYUZMliXazCwxQFS4CpOqhGoLWViMJArTRNEW6ux7V1X5ubF-LZfOa5vnqrDlxkveFaQrOATwbg_qqvS-splcVW6pqp0ELGtfci5rIbIWImtf8o8vuQ0F14dJm9nSmuPzg6CQ3xxy5bXKs0oV2vkjRlJIgaUB6-2xb5fb3T8_ISevgxTzbmiJ9i3Or-322KKqhUw55UxOn4eSPpDJdPo0ku_0B86Hlr4</recordid><startdate>199703</startdate><enddate>199703</enddate><creator>Goldman, M.</creator><creator>Roy, G.</creator><creator>Fréchette, N.</creator><creator>Décary, F.</creator><creator>Massicotte, L.</creator><creator>Delage, G.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>Blackwell Publishing</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>199703</creationdate><title>Evaluation of donor skin disinfection methods</title><author>Goldman, M. ; Roy, G. ; Fréchette, N. ; Décary, F. ; Massicotte, L. ; Delage, G.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c5158-6cd5a0b2279eaee5259055301b2dff4cdbe2d12ab2d9d6a43ce1fce1524a034a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1997</creationdate><topic>1-Propanol - pharmacology</topic><topic>Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy</topic><topic>Anti-Infective Agents, Local - pharmacology</topic><topic>Bacteria - drug effects</topic><topic>Bacteria - growth & development</topic><topic>Bacteria - isolation & purification</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Blood. Blood and plasma substitutes. Blood products. Blood cells. Blood typing. Plasmapheresis. Apheresis</topic><topic>Colony Count, Microbial</topic><topic>Evaluation Studies as Topic</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Iodine - pharmacology</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Phlebotomy</topic><topic>Povidone-Iodine - pharmacology</topic><topic>Skin - microbiology</topic><topic>Transfusions. Complications. Transfusion reactions. Cell and gene therapy</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Goldman, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roy, G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fréchette, N.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Décary, F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Massicotte, L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Delage, G.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Transfusion (Philadelphia, Pa.)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Goldman, M.</au><au>Roy, G.</au><au>Fréchette, N.</au><au>Décary, F.</au><au>Massicotte, L.</au><au>Delage, G.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Evaluation of donor skin disinfection methods</atitle><jtitle>Transfusion (Philadelphia, Pa.)</jtitle><addtitle>Transfusion</addtitle><date>1997-03</date><risdate>1997</risdate><volume>37</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>309</spage><epage>312</epage><pages>309-312</pages><issn>0041-1132</issn><eissn>1537-2995</eissn><coden>TRANAT</coden><abstract>BACKGROUND: Because most bacteria isolated from contaminated platelet concentrates are thought to originate from the donor's skin, the efficacy of four methods of skin disinfection was compared.
STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Contact plates were used for antecubital skin cultures after they were demonstrated to be easier to use and at least as sensitive as a swab system. One antecubital fossa of each subject was disinfected by a standard method, the use of a povidone‐iodine swabstick containing 0.75‐percent available iodine followed by the use of a povidone‐iodine swabstick containing 1‐percent available iodine. The other arm was disinfected with either a 70‐percent isopropyl alcohol scrub followed by an ampoule of 2‐percent iodine tincture (Group 1; n = 126); a green‐soap sponge followed by a 70‐percent isopropyl alcohol swab, used for donors who are allergic to iodine (Group 2; n = 30); or a 0.5‐percent chlorhexidine gluconate and 70‐percent isopropyl alcohol sponge followed by an ampoule of 0.5‐percent chlorhexidine gluconate and 70‐percent isopropyl alcohol (Group 3; n = 40). Contact plate cultures were done before and after disinfection, and colonies counted after a 48‐hour 37°C incubation period.
RESULTS: Similar numbers of bacteria grew from both antecubital fossae of the same subject before disinfection (p = 0.71). Compared to the standard povidoneiodine method, isopropyl alcohol and tincture of iodine resulted in significantly less bacterial growth (p<0.001), the green soap and isopropyl alcohol method resulted in significantly more bacterial growth (p<0.001), and the chlorhexidine gluconate and isopropyl alcohol method resulted in similar amounts of bacterial growth (p>0.3).
CONCLUSION: Isopropyl alcohol scrub followed by iodine tincture is more efficacious than povidone‐iodine as measured by contact plate cultures. For donors who are allergic to iodine, chlorhexidine gluconate and isopropyl alcohol is more efficacious than green soap and isopropyl alcohol.</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>9122905</pmid><doi>10.1046/j.1537-2995.1997.37397240214.x</doi><tpages>4</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0041-1132 |
| ispartof | Transfusion (Philadelphia, Pa.), 1997-03, Vol.37 (3), p.309-312 |
| issn | 0041-1132 1537-2995 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_78928971 |
| source | MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library All Journals |
| subjects | 1-Propanol - pharmacology Anesthesia. Intensive care medicine. Transfusions. Cell therapy and gene therapy Anti-Infective Agents, Local - pharmacology Bacteria - drug effects Bacteria - growth & development Bacteria - isolation & purification Biological and medical sciences Blood. Blood and plasma substitutes. Blood products. Blood cells. Blood typing. Plasmapheresis. Apheresis Colony Count, Microbial Evaluation Studies as Topic Humans Iodine - pharmacology Medical sciences Phlebotomy Povidone-Iodine - pharmacology Skin - microbiology Transfusions. Complications. Transfusion reactions. Cell and gene therapy |
| title | Evaluation of donor skin disinfection methods |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-11T23%3A25%3A39IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Evaluation%20of%20donor%20skin%20disinfection%20methods&rft.jtitle=Transfusion%20(Philadelphia,%20Pa.)&rft.au=Goldman,%20M.&rft.date=1997-03&rft.volume=37&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=309&rft.epage=312&rft.pages=309-312&rft.issn=0041-1132&rft.eissn=1537-2995&rft.coden=TRANAT&rft_id=info:doi/10.1046/j.1537-2995.1997.37397240214.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E78928971%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=78928971&rft_id=info:pmid/9122905&rfr_iscdi=true |