Trial reportBMC infectious diseases2005
Insufficient neutralization in testing a chlorhexidine-containing ethanol-based hand rub can result in a false positive efficacy assessment.
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 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Iodine-impregnated incision drape and bacterial recolonization in simulated total knee arthroplasty.Acta orthopaedica · 2016Trial
- Alcohols for skin antisepsis at clinically relevant skin sites.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2009Trial
- Hydrophilic inflatable penile prosthesis surface coatings readily rebind antibiotics and maintain antimicrobial efficacy ex vivo.International journal of impotence research · 2026Article
- Alcohol-Based Chlorhexidine and Potassium Sorbate Rub Strengthens the Effectiveness of Traditional Hand Scrubbing and Improves Long-Lasting Effectiveness-Evaluation of Hand Preparation Protocols According to EN 12791.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- SPS-neutralization in tissue samples for efficacy testing of antimicrobial peptides.BMC infectious diseases · 2019Article
- Ionic silver functionalized ovine forestomach matrix - a non-cytotoxic antimicrobial biomaterial for tissue regeneration applications.Biomaterials research · 2019Article
- 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
- Less and less-influence of volume on hand coverage and bactericidal efficacy in hand disinfection.BMC infectious diseases · 2013Article
- High-level tolerance to triclosan may play a role in Pseudomonas aeruginosa antibiotic resistance in immunocompromised hosts: evidence from outbreak investigation.BMC research notes · 2012Article
- Pitfalls in efficacy testing--how important is the validation of neutralization of chlorhexidine digluconate?Annals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials · 2008Article
- Appropriate surgical hand antisepsis.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2007Article
- Evaluation of two methods of determining the efficacies of two alcohol-based hand rubs for surgical hand antisepsis.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2006Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEffective neutralization in testing hand hygiene preparations is considered to be a crucial element to ensure validity of the test results, especially with the difficulty to neutralize chlorhexidine gluconate. Aim of the study was to measure the effect of chemical neutralization under practical test conditions according to EN 1500.
methodsWe have investigated two ethanol-based hand rubs (product A, based on 61% ethanol and 1% chlorhexidine gluconate; product B, based on 85% ethanol). The efficacy of products (application of 3 ml for 30 s) was compared to 2-propanol 60% (v/v) (two 3 ml rubs of 30 s each) on hands artificially contaminated with Escherichia coli using a cross-over design with 15 volunteers. Pre-values were obtained by rubbing fingertips for 1 minute in liquid broth. Post-values were determined by sampling immediately after disinfection in liquid broth with and without neutralizers (0.5% lecithin, 4% polysorbate 20).
resultsThe neutralizers were found to be effective and non-toxic. Without neutralization in the sampling fluid, the reference disinfection reduced the test bacteria by 3.7 log10, product B by 3.3 log10 and product A by 4.8 log10 (P = 0.001; ANOVA). With neutralization the reference disinfection reduced the test bacteria by 3.5 log10, product B by 3.3 log10 and product A by 2.7 log10 (P = 0.011; ANOVA). In comparison to the reference treatment Product B lead to a lower mean reduction than the reference disinfection but the difference was not significant (P > 0.1; Wilcoxon-Wilcox test). Without neutralizing agents in the sampling fluid, product A yielded a significantly higher reduction of test bacteria (4.8; P = 0.02) as compared to the situation with neutralizing agents (2.7; P = 0.033).
conclusionThe crucial step of neutralization lies in the sampling fluid itself in order to stop any residual bacteriostatic or bactericidal activity immediately after the application of the preparation, especially with chlorhexidine gluconate-containing preparations. This is particularly important at short application times such as the 30 s.
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.