Comparison of electric hand dryers and paper towels for hand hygiene: a critical review of the literature.

Numerous studies are published on the benefits of electric hand dryers vs paper towels (PT) for drying hands after washing. Data are conflicting and lacking key variables needed to assess infection risks. We provide a rapid scoping review on hand-drying methods relative to hygiene and health risks. Controlled vocabulary terms and keywords were used to search PubMed (1946-2018) and Embase (1947-2018). Multiple researchers independently screened abstracts for relevance using predetermined criteria and created a quality assessment scoring system for relative study comparisons. Of 293 papers, 23 were included in the final analysis. Five studies did not compare multiple methods; however, 2 generally favoured electric dryers (ED); 7 preferred PT; and 9 had mixed or statistically insignificant results (among these, 3 contained scenarios favourable to ED, 4 had results supporting PT, and the remaining studies had broadly conflicting results). Results were mixed among and within studies and many lacked consistent design or statistical analysis. The breadth of data does not favour one method as being more hygienic. However, some authors extended generalizable recommendations without sufficient scientific evidence. The use of tools in quantitative microbial risk assessment is suggested to evaluate health exposure potentials and risks relative to hand-drying methods. We found no data to support any human health claims associated with hand-drying methods. Inconclusive and conflicting results represent data gaps preventing the advancement of hand-drying policy or practice recommendations.

Assessment of the environmental microbiological cross contamination following hand drying with paper hand towels or an air blade dryer.

AIMS: This study compared the potential for cross contamination of the surrounding environment resulting from two different hand-drying methods: paper towels and the use of an air blade dryer. METHODS AND RESULTS: One hundred volunteers for each method washed their hands and dried them using one of the two methods. Bacterial contamination of the surrounding environment was measured using settle plates placed on the floor in a grid pattern, air sampling and surface swabs. Both drying methods produced ballistic droplets in the immediate vicinity of the hand-drying process. The air blade dryer produced a larger number of droplets which were dispersed over a larger area. Settle plates showed increased microbial contamination in the grid squares which were affected by ballistic droplets. Using the settle plates counts, it was estimated that approx. 1.7 × 10(5) cfu more micro-organisms were left on the laboratory floor (total area approx. 17.15 m(2)) after 100 volunteers used an air blade dryer compared to when paper towels were used. CONCLUSIONS: The two drying methods led to different patterns of ballistic droplets and levels of microbial contamination under heavy use conditions. Whilst the increase in microbial levels in the environment is not significant if only nonpathogenic micro-organisms are spread, it may increase the risk of pathogen contamination of the environment when pathogens are occasionally present on people's hands. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: The study suggests that the risk of cross contamination from the washroom users to the environment and subsequent users should be considered when choosing a hand-drying method. The data could potentially give guidance following the selection of drying methods on implementing measures to minimise the risk of cross contamination.