ArticleBMC microbiology2007
Efficacy of two ethanol-based skin antiseptics on the forehead at shorter application times.
Article in BMC microbiology, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of the antimicrobial efficacy of povidone-iodine-alcohol versus chlorhexidine-alcohol for surgical skin preparation on the aerobic and anaerobic skin flora of the shoulder region.Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2021Trial
- Efficacy of five alcohol-based skin antiseptics on sebaceous skin used at shorter application times than the current recommendation of 10 minutes.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2011Trial
- Selection of an Appropriate In Vitro Susceptibility Test for Assessing Anti-Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Efficacy of two iso-propanol-based skin antiseptics applied to human skin with many sebaceous glands for 2 and 10 minutes.GMS hygiene and infection control · 2014Article
- [Complications of peripheral regional anesthesia].Der Anaesthesist · 2011Review
- [Infection control in continuous peripheral regional anesthesia. Clinical study on disinfection time and subcutaneous tunneling in interscalene plexus anesthesia].Der Anaesthesist · 2009Article
- Pitfalls in efficacy testing--how important is the validation of neutralization of chlorhexidine digluconate?Annals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRecent research suggests that alcohol-based skin antiseptics exhibit their efficacy on the resident skin flora of the forehead in less than 10 minutes. That is why we have looked at the efficacy of two ethanol-based skin antiseptics applied for 10, 2.5 and 2 minutes on skin with a high density of sebaceous glands. Each experiment was performed in a reference-controlled cross-over design with at least 20 participants. Application of isopropanol (70%, v/v) for 10 minutes to the forehead served as the reference treatment. The clear (skin antiseptic A) and coloured preparations (skin antiseptic B) contain 85% ethanol (w/w). Pre-values and post-values (immediately after the application and after 30 min) were obtained by swabbing a marked area of 5 cm2 for about 10 s. Swabs were vortexed in tryptic soy broth containing valid neutralizing agents. After serial dilution aliquots were spread on tryptic soy agar. Colonies were counted after incubation of plates at 36 degrees C for 48 h. The mean log10 reduction of bacteria was calculated. The Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-ranks test was used for a comparison of treatments.
resultsSkin antiseptic A applied for 10 min was significantly more effective than the reference treatment. When applied for 2.5 min (three experiments) it was significantly more effective than the reference treatment immediately after application (2.7 versus 2.2 log10 reduction; p < 0.001) and equally effective after 30 min (2.8 versus 2.6 log10 reduction; p = 0.053). Skin antiseptic B applied for 2.5 min (three experiments) was significantly more effective than the reference treatment both immediately after application (2.3 versus 1.9 log10 reduction; p < 0.001) and after 30 min (2.5 versus 2.1 log10 reduction; p = 0.002).
conclusionThe clear and coloured skin antiseptics applied for 2.5 min on the skin of the forehead fulfilled the efficacy requirements for skin antisepsis. The shorter application time on skin with a high density of sebaceous glands will allow to act more efficiently in clinical practice.
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.