Evidence-based hand hygiene: Liquid or gel handrub, does it matter?

BACKGROUND: Recent studies put under scrutiny the prevailing hand hygiene guidelines, which incorporate quantitative parameters regarding handrub volume and hand size. Understanding the criticality of complete (i.e., efficient) hand hygiene in healthcare, objectivization of hand hygiene related parameters are paramount, including the formulation of the ABHR. Complete coverage can be achieved with optimal Alcohol-Based Hand Rub (ABHR) provided. The literature is limited regarding ABHR formulation variances to antimicrobial efficiency and healthcare workers' preference, while public data on clinically relevant typical application differences is not available. This study was designed and performed to compare gel and liquid format ABHRs (the two most popular types in Europe) by measuring several parameters, including application time, spillage and coverage. METHODOLOGY: Senior medical students were invited, and randomly assigned to receive pre-determined ABHR volumes (1.5 or 3 ml). All the 340 participants were given equal amounts of gel and liquid on two separate hand hygiene occasions, which occurred two weeks apart. During the hand hygiene events, by employing a digital, fully automated system paired with fluorescent-traced ABHRs, disinfectant hand coverage was objectively investigated. Furthermore, hand coverage in relation to the participants' hand sizes was also calculated. Additional data collection was performed regarding volume differences and their effect on application time, participants' volume awareness (consciousness) and disinfectant spillage during the hand hygiene events. RESULTS: The 1.5 ml ABHR volume (commonly applied in healthcare settings) is insufficient in either formulation, as the non-covered areas exceeded significant (5%+) of the total hand surface area. 3 ml, on the contrary, resulted in almost complete coverage (uncovered areas remained below 1.5%). Participants typically underestimated the volume which they needed to apply. While the liquid ABHR spreads better in the lower, 1.5 ml volume compared to the gel, the latter was easier handled at larger volume. Drying times were 30/32 s (gel and liquid formats, respectively) when 1.5 ml handrub was applied, and 40/42 s when 3 ml was used. As the evaporation rates of the ABHR used in the study are similar to those available on the market, one can presume that the results presented in the study apply for most WHO conform ABHRs. CONCLUSION: The results show that applying 1.5 ml volume was insufficient, as large part of the hand surface remained uncovered (7.0 ± 0.7% and 5.8 ± 1.0% of the hand surface in the case of gel and liquid, respectively) When 3 ml handrub was applied drying times were 40 and 42 s (gel and liquid, respectively), which is a very long time in daily clinical practice. It looks like we cannot find a volume that fits for everyone. Personalized, hand size based ABHR volumes may be the solution to find an optimal balance between maximize coverage and minimise spillage and drying time. 3 ml can be a good volume for those who have medium size hands. Large handed people should use more handrub to reach appropriate coverage, while small-handed ones may apply less to avoid massive spillage and not to take unrealistically long to dry.

Early and late effects of absorbable poly(vinyl alcohol) hernia mesh to tissue reconstruction.

Hernia is a defect of the abdominal wall. Treatment is principally surgical mesh implantation. Non-degradable surgical meshes produce numerous complications and side-effects such as inflammatory response, mesh migration and chronic pain. In contrast, the biodegradable, poly (vinyl alcohol) (PVA) based polymers have excellent chemical, mechanical and biological properties and after their degradation no chronic pain can be expected. The toxicology of PVA solution and fibers was investigated with Human dermal fibroblast- Adult cell line. Implantation tests were observed on long-term contact (rat) and large animal (swine) models. To measure the adhesion formation, Diamond and Vandendael score were used. Macroscopical and histological responses were graded from the samples. In vitro examination showed that PVA solution and fibers are biocompatible for the cells. According to the implantation tests, all samples were integrated into the surrounding tissue, and there was no foreign body reaction. The average number of adhesions was found on the non-absorbable suture line. The biocompatibility of the PVA nanofiber mesh was demonstrated. It has a non-adhesive, non-toxic and good quality structure which has the potential to be an alternative solution for the part of the hernia mesh.

Poly(amino acid) based fibrous membranes with tuneable in vivo biodegradation.

In this work two types of biodegradable polysuccinimide-based, electrospun fibrous membranes are presented. One contains disulfide bonds exhibiting a shorter (3 days) in vivo biodegradation time, while the other one has alkyl crosslinks and a longer biodegradation time (more than 7 days). According to the mechanical measurements, the tensile strength of the membranes is comparable to those of soft the connective tissues and visceral tissues. Furthermore, the suture retention test suggests, that the membranes would withstand surgical handling and in vivo fixation. The in vivo biocompatibility study demonstrates how membranes undergo in vivo hydrolysis and by the 3rd day they become poly(aspartic acid) fibrous membranes, which can be then enzymatically degraded. After one week, the disulfide crosslinked membranes almost completely degrade, while the alkyl-chain crosslinked ones mildly lose their integrity as the surrounding tissue invades them. Histopathology revealed mild acute inflammation, which diminished to a minimal level after seven days.

A large-scale investigation of alcohol-based handrub (ABHR) volume: hand coverage correlations utilizing an innovative quantitative evaluation system.

BACKGROUND: Current hand hygiene guidelines do not provide recommendations on a specific volume for the clinical hand rubbing procedure. According to recent studies volume should be adjusted in order to achieve complete coverage. However, hand size is a parameter that highly influences the hand coverage quality when using alcohol-based handrubs (ABHR). The purpose of this study was to establish a quantitative correlation between applied ABHR volume and achieved hand coverage. METHOD: ABHR based hand hygiene events were evaluated utilizing a digital health device, the Semmelweis hand hygiene system with respect to coverage achieved on the skin surface. Medical students and surgical residents (N = 356) were randomly selected and given predetermined ABHR volumes. Additionally, hand sizes were calculated using specialized software developed for this purpose. Drying time, ABHR volume awareness, as well spillage awareness were documented for each hand hygiene event. RESULTS: Hand coverage achieved during a hand hygiene event strongly depends on the applied ABHR volume. At a 1 ml dose, the uncovered hand area was approximately 7.10%, at 2 ml it decreased to 1.68%, and at 3 ml it further decreased to 1.02%. The achieved coverage is strongly correlated to hand size, nevertheless, a 3 ml applied volume proved sufficient for most hand hygiene events (84%). When applying a lower amount of ABHR (1.5 ml), even people with smaller hands failed to cover their entire hand surface. Furthermore, a 3 ml volume requires more than the guideline prescribed 20-30 s to dry. In addition, results suggest that drying time is not only affected by hand size, but perhaps other factors may be involved as well (e.g., skin temperature and degree of hydration). ABHR volumes of 3.5 ml or more were inefficient, as the disinfectant spilled while the additional rubbing time did not improve hand coverage. CONCLUSIONS: Hand sizes differ a lot among HCWs. After objectively measuring participants, the surface of the smallest hand was just over half compared to the largest hand (259 cm2 and 498 cm2, respectively). While a 3 ml ABHR volume is reasonable for medium-size hands, the need for an optimized volume of handrub for each individual is critical, as it offers several advantages. Not only it can ensure adequate hand hygiene quality, but also prevent unnecessary costs. Bluntly increasing the volume also increases spillage and therefore waste of disinfectant in the case of smaller hands. In addition, adherence could potentially decrease due to the required longer drying time, therefore, adjusting the dosage according to hand size may also increase the overall hand hygiene compliance.