Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15489352›Full record

ReviewClinical microbiology reviews2004

Epidemiologic background of hand hygiene and evaluation of the most important agents for scrubs and rubs.

Günter Kampf, Axel Kramer

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical microbiology reviews, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 198 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
198citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
12.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT01583231 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2012, after this paper: background citation

Efficacy of the Brushless Scrub

TypeinterventionalSponsorWinthrop University HospitalRan2012 to 2013Enrolled100ConditionsFocus of Study: HandwashingArmsPrewash
NCT01762904 phase3completednot on this mapstarted 2013, after this paper: background citation

Residual Effect of Chlorhexidine 2% / Isopropyl Alcohol 70% Compared to Triclosan 1% / Isopropyl Alcohol 70%

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversidad de GuanajuatoRan2013 to 2013Enrolled135ConditionsInfectious DiseasesArmsBacterial culture of the prepared skin's areas with two antiseptics and two controls, Preparing skin's areas to be tested with two antiseptics and two controls
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

198 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 759 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Hand Sanitizers: A Review on Formulation Aspects, Adverse Effects, and Regulations.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. [SBA 2020: Regional anesthesia safety recommendations update].Brazilian journal of anesthesiology (Elsevier)
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Alcohols for skin antisepsis at clinically relevant skin sites.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2009
    Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Hand Hygiene Accuracy of Students and Staff at a Dutch Dental School.European journal of dental education : official journal of the Association for Dental Education in Europe · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Observational
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

138 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Günter KampfBode Chemie GmbH & Co., Scientific Affairs, Melanchthonstrasse 27, 22525 Hamburg, Germany. guenter.kampf@bode-chemie.de.
Axel Kramer
Universität Greifswald · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The etiology of nosocomial infections, the frequency of contaminated hands with the different nosocomial pathogens, and the role of health care workers' hands during outbreaks suggest that a hand hygiene preparation should at least have activity against bacteria, yeasts, and coated viruses. The importance of efficacy in choosing the right hand hygiene product is reflected in the new Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guideline on hand hygiene (J. M. Boyce and D. Pittet, Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep. 51:1-45, 2002). The best antimicrobial efficacy can be achieved with ethanol (60 to 85%), isopropanol (60 to 80%), and n-propanol (60 to 80%). The activity is broad and immediate. Ethanol at high concentrations (e.g., 95%) is the most effective treatment against naked viruses, whereas n-propanol seems to be more effective against the resident bacterial flora. The combination of alcohols may have a synergistic effect. The antimicrobial efficacy of chlorhexidine (2 to 4%) and triclosan (1 to 2%) is both lower and slower. Additionally, both agents have a risk of bacterial resistance, which is higher for chlorhexidine than triclosan. Their activity is often supported by the mechanical removal of pathogens during hand washing. Taking the antimicrobial efficacy and the mechanical removal together, they are still less effective than the alcohols. Plain soap and water has the lowest efficacy of all. In the new Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guideline, promotion of alcohol-based hand rubs containing various emollients instead of irritating soaps and detergents is one strategy to reduce skin damage, dryness, and irritation. Irritant contact dermatitis is highest with preparations containing 4% chlorhexidine gluconate, less frequent with nonantimicrobial soaps and preparations containing lower concentrations of chlorhexidine gluconate, and lowest with well-formulated alcohol-based hand rubs containing emollients and other skin conditioners. Too few published data from comparative trials are available to reliably rank triclosan. Personnel should be reminded that it is neither necessary nor recommended to routinely wash hands after each application of an alcohol-based hand rub. Long-lasting improvement of compliance with hand hygiene protocols can be successful if an effective and accessible alcohol-based hand rub with a proven dermal tolerance and an excellent user acceptability is supplied, accompanied by education of health care workers and promotion of the use of the product.

Indexed as

Hand DisinfectionAnti-Infective Agents, LocalColony Count, MicrobialCommunicable Disease ControlCross InfectionDisinfectantsDisinfectionHandHumansPersonnel, HospitalSpores, BacterialAnti-Infective Agents, LocalDisinfectants

Identifiers

PMID15489352
PMCPMC523567
OpenAlexW2121578673

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.