Trial reportBMC infectious diseases2005
Efficacy of two distinct ethanol-based hand rubs for surgical hand disinfection -- a controlled trial according to prEN 12791.
Trial report in BMC infectious diseases, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- [SBA 2020: Regional anesthesia safety recommendations update].Brazilian journal of anesthesiology (Elsevier)Pooled it
- Insufficient neutralization in testing a chlorhexidine-containing ethanol-based hand rub can result in a false positive efficacy assessment.BMC infectious diseases · 2005Trial
- Addressing Complications in Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices: A Guideline to Prevention of CIED Infection.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Review
- Article
- Chlorhexidine is not an essential component in alcohol-based surgical hand preparation: a comparative study of two handrubs based on a modified EN 12791 test protocol.Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2017Article
- Possible risk factors associated with burn wound colonization in burn units of Gaza strip hospitals, Palestine.Annals of burns and fire disasters · 2013Review
- A large-scale assessment of hand hygiene quality and the effectiveness of the "WHO 6-steps".BMC infectious diseases · 2013Article
- Evaluation of two methods of determining the efficacies of two alcohol-based hand rubs for surgical hand antisepsis.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2006Article
- Effectiveness of three surgical alcohol-based hand rubs on skin flora.Iranian journal of nursing and midwifery researchArticle
- In small animal surgery are alcoholic hand rubs superior to scrubbing brushes and antimicrobial soap at reducing bacterial counts?Veterinary evidenceReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAim of the study was to determine the efficacy of two distinct ethanol-based hand rubs for surgical hand disinfection in a controlled cross-over trial according to prEN 12791.
methods20 subjects were included. Hands were washed for 1 min with soap. The bacterial prevalue was obtained by rubbing finger tips in TSB for 1 min. Then, each subject treated the hands with the reference procedure (n-propanol, 60% v/v) or the product (Sterillium Rub, based on 80% ethanol; Avagard, based on 61% ethanol and 1% chlorhexidine gluconate) which were all applied in 3 to 4 portions each of 3 ml for a total of 3 min. Bacterial postvalues (immediate effect) were taken from one hand, the other hand was gloved for 3 h. After gloves were taken off the second postvalue was taken for the assessment of a sustained effect.
resultsBacterial pre-values were between 4.38 +/- 0.66 and 4.46 +/- 0.71. Sterillium Rub achieved the required immediate (mean log10-reduction of 2.59 +/- 1.19) and sustained effect (1.73 +/- 1.08) compared with the reference treatment (immediate effect: 2.58 +/- 1.16; sustained effect: 1.67 +/- 0.96). Avagard, however, did not achieve the required immediate (1.82 +/- 1.40) and sustained effect (1.41 +/- 1.08) in comparison to the reference disinfection (immediate effect: 2.98 +/- 0.90; sustained effect: 2.56 +/- 1.17; p < 0.01; Wilcoxon test).
conclusionBased on our data, Sterillium Rub can be regarded to be effective for surgical hand disinfection, but Avagard can not. The addition of 1% chlorhexidine gluconate to 61% ethanol (w/w) did not outweigh an ethanol concentration of 80% (w/w).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.