Dita Mernita Setyawati, Puspa Wardhani
Dita Mernita Setyawati1, Puspa Wardhani2*
1Resident, Clinical Pathology Specialization Programme, Department of Clinical Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Airlangga University - Dr. Soetomo Hospital, Surabaya, Indonesia.
2Department of Clinical Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Airlangga University - Dr. Soetomo Hospital, Surabaya, Indonesia.
Volume - 15,
Issue - 3,
Year - 2022
This study aims to analyze the ratio of the number of microorganism colonies on the surface of medical personnel’s hands before and after the use of three types of alcohol-based handrubs. This study is an experimental study with pre and post design at Dr. Soetomo Hospital in September-October 2019 with 20 respondents for each handrub used. T-test was performed to analyze the number of microbe colonies before and after the use of handrub with the combination of chlorhexidine gluconate, meanwhile Wilcoxon test was performed to analyze the number of microbe colonies before and after the use of handrub with the combination of n-propanol and hydrogen peroxide. Effectiveness analysis of the three handrubs was done using Kruskal Wallis test. There was a significant difference in the number of microbes before and after the use of handrub (p <0.05). The lowest median value of the number of microbes after the use of an alcohol-based handrub was found in the handrub with the combination of chlorhexidine gluconate, with 96.25%, followed by hydrogen peroxide with percentage of 95.25% and n-propanol with percentage of 92%. There was no significant difference in the number of microbial colonies after the use of the three handrubs (p >0.05). Hands are an intermediary medium that often transmit pathogenic microorganisms that may cause HAIs. According to WHO, the usage of the three types of alcohol-based handrubs in this research can significantly decrease the number of germs. In conclusion, there was a significant difference in the number of microbial colonies before and after handrub usage. Alcohol-based handrub with the combination of chlorhexidine gluconate had the greatest effect on decreasing microbial colony count in this study. The contents of the three types of handrubs studied in this research were equally effective in decreasing microbial colony numbers on the hands of health workers.
Cite this article:
Dita Mernita Setyawati, Puspa Wardhani. Comparison of the effectiveness of Alcohol-Based Handrub with the combination of Chlorhexidine Gluconate, N-Propanol and Hydrogen Peroxide in Dr. Soetomo General Hospital, Surabaya, Indonesia. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology. 2022; 15(3):1037-1. doi: 10.52711/0974-360X.2022.00173
Dita Mernita Setyawati, Puspa Wardhani. Comparison of the effectiveness of Alcohol-Based Handrub with the combination of Chlorhexidine Gluconate, N-Propanol and Hydrogen Peroxide in Dr. Soetomo General Hospital, Surabaya, Indonesia. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology. 2022; 15(3):1037-1. doi: 10.52711/0974-360X.2022.00173 Available on: https://rjptonline.org/AbstractView.aspx?PID=2022-15-3-16
1. Haque M, Sartelli M, McKimm J, Abu Bakar M. Health care-associated infections - an overview. Infection and Drug Resistance. 2018; 11: 2321-2333. doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S177247
2. Girou E, Loyeau S, Legrand P, Oppein F, Brun-Buisson C. Efficacy of handrubbing with alcohol-based solution versus standard handwashing with antiseptic soap: Randomised Clinical trial. BMJ. 2002; 325(7360): 362. doi.org/10.1136/bmj.325.7360.362.
3. Pietsch H. Hand antiseptics: rubs versus scrubs, alcoholic solutions versus alcoholic gels. Journal of Hospital Infection. 2001; 48 Suppl A: S33-6. doi.org/10.1016/s0195-6701(01)90010-6
4. Hennig TJ, Werner S, Naujox K, Arndt A. Chlorhexidine is not an essential component in alcohol-based surgical hand preparation: a comparative study of two handrubs based on a modified EN 12791 test protocol. Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control. 2017; 6: 96. doi.org/10.1186/s13756-017-0258-0
5. Kampf G, Ostermeyer C. World Health Organization-recommended hand-rub formulations do not meet European efficacy requirements for surgical hand disinfection in five minutes. The Journal of Hospital Infection. 78(2): 123–127. doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2011.02.005
6. Kampf G, Ostermeyer C. Efficacy of two distinct ethanol-based hand rubs for surgical hand disinfection -- a controlled trial according to prEN 12791. BMC Infectious Diseases. 2005; 5: 17. doi.org/10.1186/1471-2334-5-17
7. Zandiyeh M, Roshanaei G. Effectiveness of three surgical alcohol-based hand rubs on skin flora. Iranian Journal of Nursing and Midwifery Research. 2015; 20(2): 221-225.
8. WHO. Guidelines on Hand Hygiene in Health Care; 2009.
9. CDC. Guideline for hand hygiene in health-care settings recommendations of the healthcare infection control practices advisory committee and the HICPAC/SHEA/APIC/IDSA Hand Hygiene Task Force. 51/RR-16; 2002.
10. Mithra S, Ramani P, Sherlin HJ, Gheena S, Ramasubramaniam A, Jayaraj G, Don KR, et al. Knowledge, attitude and practice of hand hygiene among medical students/practitioners – A survey. Research Journal of Science and Technology. 2019; 11(4): 259-264. dx.doi.org/10.5958/2349-2988.2019.00036.6
11. Niveditha S, Umamageswari SSM, Aruna D, Kalyani M. Study of hand carriage of multi drug resistant bacteria using glove juice technique in health care workers. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology. 2021; 14(2): 650-656. doi.org/10.5958/0974-360X.2021.00116.5
12. Samuel DS, Priyadarshoni SP. Use of infection control protocol among dental setup in Chennai. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology. 2019; 12(5): 2517-2521. doi.org/10.5958/0974-360X.2019.00424.4
13. Shiju DW. Intelligent hand hygiene recording and reminding method to check hospital acquired infections. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology. 2017; 10(10): 3511-3513. doi.org/10.5958/0974-360X.2017.00629.1
14. Tengku Jamaluddin TZM, Mohamed NA, Mohd Rani MD, Ismail Z, Ramli S, Faroque H, Abd Samad FN, et al. Assessment on Hand Hygiene Knowledge and Practices Among Pre-school Children in Klang Valley. Glob Pediatr Health. 2020; 7: 2333794X20976369. doi.org/10.1177/2333794X20976369.
15. Mary VJ, Thomas S, Rao S. Impact of multimodal intervention strategies on compliance to hand hygiene practices among staff nurses in obstetric and gynaecological wards. Asian Journal of Nursing Education and Research. 2021; 11(1): 123-128. doi.org/10.5958/2349-2996.2021.00032.X
16. Kavitha T. A study to assess the knowledge regarding hand hygiene among staff nurse in Wockhardt Hospital Rajkot, Gujarat State. Asian Journal of Nursing Education and Research. 2018; 8(3): 333-334. doi.org/10.5958/2349-2996.2018.00066.6
17. Kaur H, Kaur J. Hand hygiene practices among staff nurses during drug administration at selected tertiary health care centre of Ludhiana, Punjab. Asian Journal of Nursing Education and Research. 2015; 5(2): 199-201. doi.org/10.5958/2349-2996.2015.00040.3
18. Packyanathan JS, Muralidharan NP. Comparison of the antimicrobial effect of ethanolic hand Sanitizers and other hand disinfection methods in hospitals. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology. 2019; 12(1): 16-20. doi.org/10.5958/0974-360X.2019.00004.0
19. Wuriyatmi R, Rudijanto H, Cahyono T. Perbandingan efektifitas handrub aseptic gel® dan formula rw terhadap penurunan angka kuman pada tangan di RSUD Ajibarang tahun 2016. Buletin Kesehatan Lingkungan Masyarakat. 2016; 35(4): 278-396. doi.org/10.31983/keslingmas.v35i4.3098