The influence of cosmetic additives on the acceptability of alcohol-based hand disinfectants

Rotter, M.; Koller, Walter; Neumann, R.

doi:10.1016/0195-6701(91)90264-9

Cited by 64 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…7 ' 912 ' 17,27 ' 29 Several studies have documented that such preparations are well tolerated by healthcare workers. 6 ' 18 ' 19 ' 2230 ' 31 Unfortunately, most healthcare workers are not familiar with these studies, and the view that frequent use of alcoholbased hand antiseptics will lead to excessive skin dryness has persisted in many hospitals in the United States.…”

Section: Have Taken the Unusual Step Of Requesting An Editorial Fromentioning

confidence: 99%

Using Alcohol for Hand Antisepsis: Dispelling Old Myths

Boyce

2000

Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Have Taken the Unusual Step Of Requesting An Editorial Fromentioning

confidence: 99%

Using Alcohol for Hand Antisepsis: Dispelling Old Myths

Boyce

2000

Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Antimicrobial soaps are equally recommended as plain soap for washing hands indicating that the evidence in favour of antimicrobial soaps is rather weak 31) . Alcohol-based hand rubs should fulfil the relevant efficacy requirements 47) and be a formulation that includes emollients 31,48,49) . Lack of emollients may lead to dryness of skin and may impair compliance.…”

Section: Practical Principles To Select a Soap And To Select An Alcohmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prevention of Irritant Contact Dermatitis among Health Care Workers by Using Evidence-Based Hand Hygiene Practices: A Review

Kampf

Löffler

2007

INDUSTRIAL HEALTH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Irritant contact dermatitis is often found on the hands of healthcare workers and is generally caused by frequent hand washing, gloves, aggressive disinfectants or detergents. Alcohols have only a marginal irritation potential, although they may cause a burning sensation on pre-irritated skin. A burning sensation when using alcohols therefore, suggests that the skin barrier is already damaged. Two options for hand hygiene are generally available in clinical practice: (1) hand washing with some type of soap and water or (2) hand disinfection with alcohol-based hand rubs. Most clinical situations require the use of an alcohol-based hand rub for decontamination, which is especially useful for reducing the nosocomial transmission of various infectious agents. Washing one's hands should be the exception, to be performed only when they are visibly soiled or contaminated with proteinaceous material, or visibly soiled with blood or other body fluids. The overall compliance rate in hand hygiene is around 50%, which is far too low. In addition, healthcare workers quite often wash their hands with soap and water, when they should use an alcohol-based hand rub. This not only adds to the degree of skin irritation, but is also potentially dangerous for patients, due to the low efficacy of hand washing when compared to hand disinfection with alcohol rubs. Adhering to evidence-based hand hygiene protocols and following international guidelines on hand hygiene practices therefore, can help prevent irritant contact dermatitis among healthcare workers.

show abstract

“…For example, the drying effect of alcohol can be reduced or eliminated by adding 1-3% glycerol or other skin conditioning agents. 219,221,267,268,273,301,313,326,327 Moreover, in prospective trials, alcohol-based solutions or gels containing humectants caused significantly less skin irritation and dryness than the soaps or antimicrobial detergents tested. 262,264,328,329 These studies, which were conducted in clinical settings, used a variety of subjective and objective methods for assessing skin irritation and dryness.…”

Section: Alcoholsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several studies have published methods to evaluate dermal tolerance such as dryness or irritation 220,577 , either by self-assessment or by expert clinical evaluation 197,221,264,326,327,329,405,495,504,608,610,613,636 (see Part I, Section 14). Some studies have confirmed that these assessment techniques correlate well with other physiological measures such as transepidermal water loss or desquamation, tests which are not practical to use in clinical settings.…”

Section: Dermal Tolerance and Skin Reactionsmentioning

confidence: 99%