Gloved hand as applicator of antiseptic to operation sites.
A 95% ethanol solution containing 0-5% chlorhexidine digluconate caused a significantly greater mean reduction in skin bacteria (99-9% plus or minus 0-024) when rubbed by a gloved hand on to the skin of one hand for two minutes than when applied to the same area for the same time with the traditional gauze applicator for operation sites (90-7% plus or minus 2-12). The latter reduction, however, was greater than that reported in five previous experiments in which application of the same solution for the same time to two hands gave mean reductions varying from 79% to 84%. An aqueous solution and a 70% alcoholic solution of chlorhexidine also gave significantly greater reduction (and alcoholic povidone iodine almost significantly greater reduction) when applied by a gloved hand than on gauze. It is inferred that the effectiveness of skin disinfection depends both on the antiseptic used and on the manner of application, and varies with the amount of friction used in applying the antiseptic. Further studies on disinfection of the surgeon's hands with 0-5% chlorhexidine in 95% alcohol rubbed on and allowed to dry have supported its value and acceptability; the mean bacterial counts of washings from gloves of surgeons after operations were lower after the use of this method than after other preoperative preparations of the hands.[1]References
- Gloved hand as applicator of antiseptic to operation sites. Lowbury, E.J., Lilly, H.A. Lancet (1975) [Pubmed]
Annotations and hyperlinks in this abstract are from individual authors of WikiGenes or automatically generated by the WikiGenes Data Mining Engine. The abstract is from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.About WikiGenesOpen Access LicencePrivacy PolicyTerms of Useapsburg
