Effectiveness of hand washing and disinfection methods in removing transient bacteria after patient nursing
The effectiveness of various hand washing and disinfection methods in removing transient skin bacteria was studied in hospital after dry or moist contamination of the hands when nursing burn patients. The results were compared with those of laboratory tests with volunteers. A fairly good correlation...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Journal of hygiene 1980-10, Vol.85 (2), p.193-203 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 203 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 193 |
container_title | The Journal of hygiene |
container_volume | 85 |
creator | Ojajaervi, J |
description | The effectiveness of various hand washing and disinfection methods in removing transient skin bacteria was studied in hospital after dry or moist contamination of the hands when nursing burn patients. The results were compared with those of laboratory tests with volunteers. A fairly good correlation of the bacterial reductions existed between hospital and laboratory tests. All other methods removed Slaph. aureus from the hands more effectively than liquid soap. Gram-negative bacilli were more easily removed than staphylococci, even with soap wash alone. In hospital, none of the washing and disinfection methods always removed all patient-borne bacteria from the hands. After dry or moist contamination and subsequent washing with soap only, colonies of Staph. aureus were often detected in finger-print samples. Staphylococci wero more often completely removed by a 4% chlorhexidine detergent scrub and alcoholic solutions (either with or without previous soap wash) than by liquid soap, hexachlorophene or iodophor preparations. Gram-negative bacilli were more easily removed by all the washing and disinfection methods. After moist contamination, Gram-negative bacilli were more often completely removed from the hands by ethanol than by other treatments. The results of the present study emphasize the importance of always using gloves when nursing a profuse spreader of bacteria or one who must be protected from infection. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1017/S0022172400063221 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_2133933</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1017_S0022172400063221</cupid><jstor_id>3862201</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>3862201</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c594t-d9f71e5c66ae913ad45a9d5413a9d768ba8bca4ab67efc9c63f0e393eec328a53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkV-L1DAUxYMo67j6AQSFPvlWTZo0aV4EWdZdYf2zuPoabtPbmcxOkzFpR_32pjvDoAj6dC_5nXs44RDylNGXjDL16jOlVcVUJSilkuf1HllUXMuyYY24TxYzLmf-kDxKaU1pLRTjJ-REKtVoJhbk9rzv0Y5uhx5TKkJfrMB3xXdIK-eXxbx3Ljl_Jwq-GHBchS4VzhcRh7CbRWMEnxz6sWjBjhgdFNDnWWxhvHv2U8wWy8fkQQ-bhE8O85R8eXt-c3ZZXn28eHf25qq0tRZj2eleMaytlICacehEDbqrRV51p2TTQtNaENBKhb3VVvKeItcc0fKqgZqfktd73-3UDtjZHCHCxmyjGyD-NAGc-ZN4tzLLsDMV49mHZ4MXB4MYvk2YRjO4ZHGzAY9hSkbVggpa6_8KWc0lbcQcie2FNoaUIvbHNIyauUrzV5X55vnv3zheHLrL_Nmer9MY4hHzRlYVnc_LPXZpxB9HDPE2O3BVG3lxbdTlzYevn_S1eZ_1_BARhja6bolmHaboc1P_CPkLeI_Eww</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>15360845</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Effectiveness of hand washing and disinfection methods in removing transient bacteria after patient nursing</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Ojajaervi, J</creator><creatorcontrib>Ojajaervi, J</creatorcontrib><description>The effectiveness of various hand washing and disinfection methods in removing transient skin bacteria was studied in hospital after dry or moist contamination of the hands when nursing burn patients. The results were compared with those of laboratory tests with volunteers. A fairly good correlation of the bacterial reductions existed between hospital and laboratory tests. All other methods removed Slaph. aureus from the hands more effectively than liquid soap. Gram-negative bacilli were more easily removed than staphylococci, even with soap wash alone. In hospital, none of the washing and disinfection methods always removed all patient-borne bacteria from the hands. After dry or moist contamination and subsequent washing with soap only, colonies of Staph. aureus were often detected in finger-print samples. Staphylococci wero more often completely removed by a 4% chlorhexidine detergent scrub and alcoholic solutions (either with or without previous soap wash) than by liquid soap, hexachlorophene or iodophor preparations. Gram-negative bacilli were more easily removed by all the washing and disinfection methods. After moist contamination, Gram-negative bacilli were more often completely removed from the hands by ethanol than by other treatments. The results of the present study emphasize the importance of always using gloves when nursing a profuse spreader of bacteria or one who must be protected from infection.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-1724</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2396-8184</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/S0022172400063221</identifier><identifier>PMID: 6778914</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Bacteria ; Chlorhexidine - pharmacology ; Detergents ; Disinfection ; Disinfection - methods ; Ethanol ; Ethanol - pharmacology ; Fingers ; Gram-Negative Aerobic Bacteria - isolation & purification ; Hand - microbiology ; Hands ; Hexachlorobenzene - pharmacology ; Humans ; Iodophors ; Iodophors - pharmacology ; Liquids ; Nursing Care ; Pseudomonas aeruginosa - isolation & purification ; Soaps ; Soaps - pharmacology ; Staphylococcus aureus - isolation & purification ; Sterilization - methods ; Washing</subject><ispartof>The Journal of hygiene, 1980-10, Vol.85 (2), p.193-203</ispartof><rights>Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1980</rights><rights>Copyright 1980 Cambridge University Press</rights><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c594t-d9f71e5c66ae913ad45a9d5413a9d768ba8bca4ab67efc9c63f0e393eec328a53</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c594t-d9f71e5c66ae913ad45a9d5413a9d768ba8bca4ab67efc9c63f0e393eec328a53</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/3862201$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/3862201$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,803,885,27924,27925,53791,53793,58017,58250</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6778914$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ojajaervi, J</creatorcontrib><title>Effectiveness of hand washing and disinfection methods in removing transient bacteria after patient nursing</title><title>The Journal of hygiene</title><addtitle>J. Hyg</addtitle><description>The effectiveness of various hand washing and disinfection methods in removing transient skin bacteria was studied in hospital after dry or moist contamination of the hands when nursing burn patients. The results were compared with those of laboratory tests with volunteers. A fairly good correlation of the bacterial reductions existed between hospital and laboratory tests. All other methods removed Slaph. aureus from the hands more effectively than liquid soap. Gram-negative bacilli were more easily removed than staphylococci, even with soap wash alone. In hospital, none of the washing and disinfection methods always removed all patient-borne bacteria from the hands. After dry or moist contamination and subsequent washing with soap only, colonies of Staph. aureus were often detected in finger-print samples. Staphylococci wero more often completely removed by a 4% chlorhexidine detergent scrub and alcoholic solutions (either with or without previous soap wash) than by liquid soap, hexachlorophene or iodophor preparations. Gram-negative bacilli were more easily removed by all the washing and disinfection methods. After moist contamination, Gram-negative bacilli were more often completely removed from the hands by ethanol than by other treatments. The results of the present study emphasize the importance of always using gloves when nursing a profuse spreader of bacteria or one who must be protected from infection.</description><subject>Bacteria</subject><subject>Chlorhexidine - pharmacology</subject><subject>Detergents</subject><subject>Disinfection</subject><subject>Disinfection - methods</subject><subject>Ethanol</subject><subject>Ethanol - pharmacology</subject><subject>Fingers</subject><subject>Gram-Negative Aerobic Bacteria - isolation & purification</subject><subject>Hand - microbiology</subject><subject>Hands</subject><subject>Hexachlorobenzene - pharmacology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Iodophors</subject><subject>Iodophors - pharmacology</subject><subject>Liquids</subject><subject>Nursing Care</subject><subject>Pseudomonas aeruginosa - isolation & purification</subject><subject>Soaps</subject><subject>Soaps - pharmacology</subject><subject>Staphylococcus aureus - isolation & purification</subject><subject>Sterilization - methods</subject><subject>Washing</subject><issn>0022-1724</issn><issn>2396-8184</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1980</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkV-L1DAUxYMo67j6AQSFPvlWTZo0aV4EWdZdYf2zuPoabtPbmcxOkzFpR_32pjvDoAj6dC_5nXs44RDylNGXjDL16jOlVcVUJSilkuf1HllUXMuyYY24TxYzLmf-kDxKaU1pLRTjJ-REKtVoJhbk9rzv0Y5uhx5TKkJfrMB3xXdIK-eXxbx3Ljl_Jwq-GHBchS4VzhcRh7CbRWMEnxz6sWjBjhgdFNDnWWxhvHv2U8wWy8fkQQ-bhE8O85R8eXt-c3ZZXn28eHf25qq0tRZj2eleMaytlICacehEDbqrRV51p2TTQtNaENBKhb3VVvKeItcc0fKqgZqfktd73-3UDtjZHCHCxmyjGyD-NAGc-ZN4tzLLsDMV49mHZ4MXB4MYvk2YRjO4ZHGzAY9hSkbVggpa6_8KWc0lbcQcie2FNoaUIvbHNIyauUrzV5X55vnv3zheHLrL_Nmer9MY4hHzRlYVnc_LPXZpxB9HDPE2O3BVG3lxbdTlzYevn_S1eZ_1_BARhja6bolmHaboc1P_CPkLeI_Eww</recordid><startdate>19801001</startdate><enddate>19801001</enddate><creator>Ojajaervi, J</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><scope>BSCLL</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>7T7</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19801001</creationdate><title>Effectiveness of hand washing and disinfection methods in removing transient bacteria after patient nursing</title><author>Ojajaervi, J</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c594t-d9f71e5c66ae913ad45a9d5413a9d768ba8bca4ab67efc9c63f0e393eec328a53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1980</creationdate><topic>Bacteria</topic><topic>Chlorhexidine - pharmacology</topic><topic>Detergents</topic><topic>Disinfection</topic><topic>Disinfection - methods</topic><topic>Ethanol</topic><topic>Ethanol - pharmacology</topic><topic>Fingers</topic><topic>Gram-Negative Aerobic Bacteria - isolation & purification</topic><topic>Hand - microbiology</topic><topic>Hands</topic><topic>Hexachlorobenzene - pharmacology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Iodophors</topic><topic>Iodophors - pharmacology</topic><topic>Liquids</topic><topic>Nursing Care</topic><topic>Pseudomonas aeruginosa - isolation & purification</topic><topic>Soaps</topic><topic>Soaps - pharmacology</topic><topic>Staphylococcus aureus - isolation & purification</topic><topic>Sterilization - methods</topic><topic>Washing</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ojajaervi, J</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>The Journal of hygiene</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ojajaervi, J</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Effectiveness of hand washing and disinfection methods in removing transient bacteria after patient nursing</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of hygiene</jtitle><addtitle>J. Hyg</addtitle><date>1980-10-01</date><risdate>1980</risdate><volume>85</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>193</spage><epage>203</epage><pages>193-203</pages><issn>0022-1724</issn><eissn>2396-8184</eissn><abstract>The effectiveness of various hand washing and disinfection methods in removing transient skin bacteria was studied in hospital after dry or moist contamination of the hands when nursing burn patients. The results were compared with those of laboratory tests with volunteers. A fairly good correlation of the bacterial reductions existed between hospital and laboratory tests. All other methods removed Slaph. aureus from the hands more effectively than liquid soap. Gram-negative bacilli were more easily removed than staphylococci, even with soap wash alone. In hospital, none of the washing and disinfection methods always removed all patient-borne bacteria from the hands. After dry or moist contamination and subsequent washing with soap only, colonies of Staph. aureus were often detected in finger-print samples. Staphylococci wero more often completely removed by a 4% chlorhexidine detergent scrub and alcoholic solutions (either with or without previous soap wash) than by liquid soap, hexachlorophene or iodophor preparations. Gram-negative bacilli were more easily removed by all the washing and disinfection methods. After moist contamination, Gram-negative bacilli were more often completely removed from the hands by ethanol than by other treatments. The results of the present study emphasize the importance of always using gloves when nursing a profuse spreader of bacteria or one who must be protected from infection.</abstract><cop>Cambridge, UK</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><pmid>6778914</pmid><doi>10.1017/S0022172400063221</doi><tpages>11</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0022-1724 |
ispartof | The Journal of hygiene, 1980-10, Vol.85 (2), p.193-203 |
issn | 0022-1724 2396-8184 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_2133933 |
source | MEDLINE; JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing; PubMed Central |
subjects | Bacteria Chlorhexidine - pharmacology Detergents Disinfection Disinfection - methods Ethanol Ethanol - pharmacology Fingers Gram-Negative Aerobic Bacteria - isolation & purification Hand - microbiology Hands Hexachlorobenzene - pharmacology Humans Iodophors Iodophors - pharmacology Liquids Nursing Care Pseudomonas aeruginosa - isolation & purification Soaps Soaps - pharmacology Staphylococcus aureus - isolation & purification Sterilization - methods Washing |
title | Effectiveness of hand washing and disinfection methods in removing transient bacteria after patient nursing |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-20T05%3A56%3A05IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Effectiveness%20of%20hand%20washing%20and%20disinfection%20methods%20in%20removing%20transient%20bacteria%20after%20patient%20nursing&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20hygiene&rft.au=Ojajaervi,%20J&rft.date=1980-10-01&rft.volume=85&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=193&rft.epage=203&rft.pages=193-203&rft.issn=0022-1724&rft.eissn=2396-8184&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/S0022172400063221&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_pubme%3E3862201%3C/jstor_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=15360845&rft_id=info:pmid/6778914&rft_cupid=10_1017_S0022172400063221&rft_jstor_id=3862201&rfr_iscdi=true |