![]() Kramer A, Rudolph P, Kampf G, Pittet D: Limited efficacy of alcohol-based hand gels. Pittet D, Hugonnet S, Harbarth S, Mourouga P, Sauvan V, Touveneau S, Perneger TV, Members of the Infection Control Programme: Effectiveness of a hospital-wide programme to improve compliance with hand hygiene. Traore O, Hugonnet S, Lubbe J, Griffiths W, Pittet D: Liquid versus gel handrub formulation: a prospective intervention study. Further studies on the tolerance and acceptability of hand rubs that meet microbiological efficacy criteria are critical to the long-term success of hand hygiene promotion, a worldwide priority challenge for patient safety. In particular, the present study focuses on activities with a high risk of cross-transmission and was performed in a high-workload setting, both conditions being typically associated with an increased risk for lower compliance. Ĭompliance in this study cannot be compared with previous reports, including our own, for several reasons. Long-term monitoring of practices is also critical. We acknowledge several study limitations, including seasonal variation, and we recognise that research is needed in different geographical regions. It fulfils all the criteria and, additionally, controls for major confounders of compliance. ![]() By comparing a liquid hand rub with its gel counterpart, and by using a gel that meets the EN 1500 standards, our study is unique. To merit publication, studies assessing the tolerance and acceptability of hand rubs must imperatively use products that meet the most stringent criteria for antimicrobial efficacy (EN 1500 standards), must use recognised evaluation tools, and must monitor user compliance in daily clinical practice. Given the excellent tolerance of both formulations and user preference, both liquids and gels are currently used in our intensive care unit in large amounts (~80 l/1,000 patient-days).Īs emphasised, most liquid hand rubs have a significantly better antimicrobial efficacy than gels. In our study, compliance tended to be higher when the gel was in use but, most importantly, the most critical factor and strongest predictor of compliance was the standardised access to hand rub (liquid or gel) at the patient point of care. ![]() ![]() We share the concerns of Maiwald and Widmer regarding the possible interpretation of our study results, and agree that the results should not be used in favour of gels. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |