A national survey of skin health in nursing personnel.

BACKGROUND: Hand dermatitis is a well-established occupational risk in nursing staff. AIMS: To explore skin health in nursing staff and to develop resources and recommendations to promote good skincare at work. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey. RESULTS: We analysed data from 1,545 surveys. Forty-six percent reported 'poor' skin health and the majority (93%) experienced at least one skin problem over the previous 12 months, with only 22% seeking help from their employer. Only 2% took time off work due to skin problems, with many expressing concerns that taking sick leave would be viewed negatively by others. Over half (53%) had reduced or stopped using antibacterial rubs and soap, and 18% had reduced the use of gloves. Most respondents used hand cream and over half used products they had purchased themselves. Only 42% received skin health care information from employers, with fewer (26%) receiving training on how to identify early signs of skin disease. Only 16% had access to skin surveillance in line with regulatory requirements. Only 26% of respondents were aware of the support offered by their professional nursing association. Suggestions for improving skin health included increasing publicity concerning the importance of skin health in healthcare settings, improving access to hand creams, better quality products, enhanced education and training and more involvement from Occupational Health (OH). CONCLUSIONS: Results confirm that poor skin health remains a persistent problem for nurses. Employers could do more to promote skin health and nurses need to be made more aware of the support and guidance offered by professional bodies.

Impact of hand sanitizer format (gel/foam/liquid) and dose amount on its sensory properties and acceptability for improving hand hygiene compliance.

BACKGROUND: Effective alcohol-based hand rubs (ABHRs) and healthcare worker compliance with hand hygiene guidelines are important in the prevention of infection transmission in healthcare settings. Compliance to hand hygiene guidelines is affected by many factors including education, ABHR availability, time pressure, skin health, and user acceptance of the sensory properties of ABHRs during and after application. AIM: To examine the effect of ABHR format (gel/foam/liquid) and dose (0.7 mL, 1.5 mL, 3 mL) on its sensory properties and acceptability, and to consider how this might affect healthcare workers' hand hygiene compliance. METHODS: Sensory descriptive analysis established key sensory differences between ten market-leading ABHRs (three gels, four foams, two liquids, one aerosol foam). Focus groups reinforced these differences. FINDINGS: All formats were less desirable at the highest dose as they were more difficult to handle than the lower doses. Foams and gels became stickier, less clean-feeling and slower to dry at higher doses. Liquids gave a cleaner, smoother, more moisturized feel, but the increased difficulty in handling and applying the product negated these benefits. Overall, the gel and foam formats were more desirable than the liquid. The key desirable properties include: fast absorption, soft/moisturized hand feel, not sticky, clean feel, and low smell. CONCLUSION: The 1.5 mL dose yielded the most acceptable properties with no extreme negative consequences. The foam provided the benefits of both the liquid and gel and combined them into a more widely acceptable format that may lead to greater hand hygiene compliance.

Comparison of the efficacy and drying times of liquid, gel and foam formats of alcohol-based hand rubs.

BACKGROUND: Hand rubs containing alcohols such as isopropanol (IPA) or ethanol (EtOH) are widely used for hygienic hand disinfection, and are presented in different formats (i.e. liquid, gel or foam). AIM: To determine if there is any difference in efficacy between these two active ingredients in the three formats. In addition, an assessment of the drying time was undertaken. Two non-commercial, 'standard' formulations were tested in each format: one containing 60% IPA, and the other containing 80% EtOH. METHODS: EN 1500 tests were performed with 20 volunteers to assess efficacy. The reference product was 2 x 3 mL of 60% IPA for 60 s, as described in EN 1500 (2013). The test products were 3 mL of liquid, gel or foam format; one full EN 1500 test was performed for each formulation (60% IPA and 80% EtOH). To assess drying time, two different volumes (1.5 and 3.0 mL) of the test formulations in liquid, gel or foam format were applied to the hands of 15 volunteers. Volunteers self-reported when their hands were dry; at the end of the test, the volunteers were asked to rate the time taken to dry on a three-point scale (too short, OK, too long). FINDINGS: This study found no difference in antibacterial efficacy attributable to formulation or format for the two 'standard' ABHR formulations, as assessed by EN 1500. When measured objectively, the EtOH-based formulations dried more rapidly than the IPA-based formulations, and for both formulations, gels took longer to dry than other formats. User perception of drying time broadly agreed with objective measurement. CONCLUSION: Given that there was no difference in efficacy and only moderate difference in drying time, it is proposed that ABHR in liquid, foam or gel format may be appropriate, provided that the specific product passes the required efficacy and safety standards.

Dose considerations for alcohol-based hand rubs.

BACKGROUND: Manufacturers' recommended dosages for alcohol-based hand rubs are typically determined by measuring product efficacy using a model protocol such as EN 1500; however, anecdotal reports and informal observation suggests that in many cases users self-titrate to much lower doses in real-world application. AIM: To examine the interdependence of alcohol-based hand-rub volume on in-vivo efficacy using the EN 1500 standard test method, on drying time on users' hands, and on their perceptions of acceptability. METHODS: Three formulations were studied using EN 1500 and a modification of this method. The modification used volumes ranging from 0.5 to 3.0 mL and 30 s application. Drying times were recorded and user acceptability was established using a three-point scale (too long, OK, or too short). Dying times were analysed in relation to hand surface area. FINDINGS: The drying time for all three products increased as a function of volume. The drying time displayed a positive association with volume and a negative association with hand surface area. The optimum volume for user acceptability was between 1.5 and 2 mL, yielding a drying time of between 20 and 30 s. CONCLUSION: Whereas EN 1500 is appropriate for establishing the efficacy of a hygienic hand-rub formulation compared to a benchmark, it does not reflect actual in-use conditions or the likely clinical effectiveness of the product. In particular, it fails to address the need to optimize the volume of application and user acceptability of the product.

Difficulties in the diagnosis of intracystic tumors of the female breast.

The objective of the current study was to determine the accuracy of radiological and cytological diagnoses of intracystic and papillary lesions in distinguishing between true papillary benign and malignant lesions. Seventy cytological reports of intracystic proliferations were selected from our cytopathological database at the Breast Health Corporation, Budapest, Hungary, dating back to the last 7 years. Retrospective analysis of the diagnostic approaches--mammography, ultrasonography, clinical examination and cytology--was performed in selected cases. The results of imaging and cytological examination are routinely reported on a categorical scale ranging from 1 to 5. 44 patients underwent surgical excision: histology showed benign lesions in 21 and malignant lesions in 23 cases. Twelve patients, who did not undergo biopsy and presented a stable disease at follow-ups, were also included in the group of benign lesion. Fifteen patients were not available for follow-up. Concerning the total investigated cases the mean categorical values of mammography, ultrasonography and cytology were 2.24, 2.78 and 3.05 respectively. The malignant and benign groups significantly differ from each other concerning the mean age of the patients (p=0.0216), the distribution of the coded mammographical results (p= 0.0171) the cytological results (p=0.0001), and average tumor size measured on mammogram images (p=0.0199). The two group does not significantly differ over the distribution of mammographical density patterns (p=0.1075), radiomorphological appearance (p=0.1101), average tumor size measured on ultrasonography (p=0.2665), and patient complaints (p=0.2634). The evaluation of ultrasonography shows borderline significance (Pearson Chi-square test: p=0.0616, M-L Chi-square test: p=0.0404) between the malignant and benign groups. Differential diagnosis between malignant and benign intracystic and papillary lesions is feasible using common radiological diagnostics. However, more efficient teamwork is needed with the cooperation of a well-trained cytologist and radiologist, who are able to produce precise images of the lesions, and guides the aspiration of the adequate samples for cytology, which is the most valuable examination.