Surgical hand antisepsis in veterinary practice: Evaluation of soap scrubs and alcohol based rub techniques

Verwilghen, Denis; Mainil, Jacques; Mastrocicco, Emilie; Hamaide, Annick; Detilleux, Johann; Galen, Gaby Van; Serteyn, Didier; Grulke, Sigrid

doi:10.1016/j.tvjl.2010.12.020

Cited by 37 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…107 These findings have lead to a distinct trend in surgical hand asepsis amongst veterinary surgeons to move away from the traditional surgical scrub technique to an alcoholic based rub. 25,108 Verwighen reports that there is increasing evidence that alcoholic rub solutions may be more effective than traditional medicated soaps, and are associated with better tolerance and compliance with surgical hygiene protocols. 25,45 Another theory is that the seepage of serum from the damaged skin surface inactivates the residual effect of an antiseptic and leads to higher CFU counts.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative efficacy of three antiseptics as surgical skin preparations in dogs

Boucher

Henton²,

Becker

et al. 2018

Veterinary Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To compare the antimicrobial efficacy of a 2% chlorhexidine gluconate and 70% ethanol solution (CG+A) with that of F10 Skin Prep Solution (F10) and electrochemically activated water (EAW) when used as a surgical preparation in canine patients. Study design Prospective randomized clinical study. Sample population One hundred sixteen dogs presented for ovariohysterectomy. Methods Dogs were randomly divided into 1 of the 3 antiseptic groups (CG+A, F10, EAW). Skin samples with replicating organism detection and counting plates were taken at 4 different perioperative sites and time intervals (postskin preparation, postskin antisepsis, 2 hours after the second sample, and at the end of surgery) during ovariohysterectomies performed by students. The colony forming unit (CFU) counts from each sample were quantified according to the level of bacterial contamination. Zero CFU was defined as no contamination, 1‐12 CFU was defined as low contamination, and greater than 12 CFU was defined as high contamination. The 3 antiseptics were compared with respect to the level of contamination. Results There was no difference in the level of colonization between the antiseptics at the first sampling time (P = .454). However, the level of contamination for CG+A was lower compared with F10 and EAW at the second, third, and fourth sampling times (P = .001, P = .01, P = .02, respectively). Conclusion CG+A was more effective at achieving a zero CFU count and low levels of contamination compared with F10 and EAW for surgical preparation in dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy. Clinical significance This study does not provide evidence to support the use of F10 and EAW instead of CG+A for the surgical skin preparation of dogs undergoing ovariohysterectomy.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative efficacy of three antiseptics as surgical skin preparations in dogs

Boucher

Henton²,

Becker

et al. 2018

Veterinary Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many other countries frequently use alcohol-based solutions. There are controversial results in the literature indicating that alcohol-based hand rubs are superior to 7.5% PVI (8,9), but others have found no differences (7).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…In the first step, they apply plain liquid soap for up to one minute, and in the second step, scrubbing with 7.5% povidone iodine solution (PVI) up to three minutes is performed. It has been reported that alcohol hand rubs are more effective than PVI on account of the fact that it has a broader spectrum of activity, better skin tolerance and faster action on skin (8,9); however, some studies have revealed no difference between two the products (7). In this study, we analyzed the efficacy of the two products in surgical hand disinfection: alcohol hand rub and 7.5% povidone iodine.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Two Surgical Hand Antiseptic Techniques: Hand Rubbing and Hand Washing With Alcohol-Based Agent and 7.5% Povidone Iodine

Asadpoor-Dezaki¹,

Barabady²,

Abtahi³

2016

Crit Care Nurs J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Hand disinfection is a major part of infection control during a surgical procedure. In contrast to developed countries, where the use of alcohol-based solutions (ABS) is routine, the usual practice in Iran is hand scrubbing using Povidone Iodine Solution (PVI). Most researchers have concluded that ABS might be superior to PVI, but others have found no differences. In this study the disinfection efficacy of ABS was compared to PVI. Methods: Thirty-one volunteers including surgeons and operating room nurses (OR-nurses) participated in this cross over design study. For one week they used ABS and the next week they used PVI for pre-surgical hand disinfection. Samples were obtained from the hands of all participants before, immediately after and two hours after hand washing. The bacterial contamination rate was evaluated by a microbiologist. Results: Our results demonstrated that ABS led to significantly lower mean Colony Forming Units (CFU) immediately after hand disinfection, but no significant differences were found between the two groups after two hours. Also, alcohol-based solution revealed a significantly higher logarithmic reduction factor (RF) of skin flora as an instantaneous effect. Both solutions were effective against Staphylococcus aureus, but the minimum reduction rate was in eliminating the Bacillus group. Conclusions: In conclusion, ABS can be promoted as the best choice for surgical hand disinfection solution amongst emergency situations, in that it has a time saving character and better instantaneous effect on bacterial skin flora reduction.

show abstract

“…In the first study (Chou et al, 2016) there were 2 formulations of alcohol used: propanol (of different strengths) and alcohol with CHG, of which the alcohol with CHG was found to be the most effective. In the second study (Verwilghen et al 2011) the only alcohol formulation used was propanol (Sterilium). The PICO question only specifies AHRs rather than particular formulations so both studies are relevant.…”

Section: Appraisal Application and Reflectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

In Small Animal Surgery Are Alcoholic Hand Rubs Superior to Scrubbing Brushes and Antimicrobial Soap at Reducing Bacterial Counts?

Mann

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Clinical bottom lineThe current literature suggests that the use of alcohol hand rubs provide similar, if not better, reductions in bacteria colony forming units, both immediately after hand antisepsis and in the immediate postoperative period. <img src="https://www.veterinaryevidence.org/rcvskmod/icons/oa-icon.jpg" alt="Open Access" /> <img src="https://www.veterinaryevidence.org/rcvskmod/icons/pr-icon.jpg" alt="Peer Reviewed" />

show abstract

Surgical hand antisepsis in veterinary practice: Evaluation of soap scrubs and alcohol based rub techniques

Cited by 37 publications

References 35 publications

Comparative efficacy of three antiseptics as surgical skin preparations in dogs

Comparative efficacy of three antiseptics as surgical skin preparations in dogs

Comparison of Two Surgical Hand Antiseptic Techniques: Hand Rubbing and Hand Washing With Alcohol-Based Agent and 7.5% Povidone Iodine

In Small Animal Surgery Are Alcoholic Hand Rubs Superior to Scrubbing Brushes and Antimicrobial Soap at Reducing Bacterial Counts?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About