Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28030544›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2016

Seeking Clearer Recommendations for Hand Hygiene in Communities Facing Ebola: A Randomized Trial Investigating the Impact of Six Handwashing Methods on Skin Irritation and Dermatitis.

Marlene K Wolfe, Emma Wells, Brittany Mitro, Anne Marie Desmarais, Pamela Scheinman, Daniele Lantagne

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
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

6 authors.

Marlene K WolfeDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Tuft University, Medford, Massachusetts, United States of America.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6476-0450
Emma WellsDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Tuft University, Medford, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Brittany MitroDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Tuft University, Medford, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Anne Marie DesmaraisDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Tuft University, Medford, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Pamela ScheinmanDepartment of Dermatology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Daniele LantagneDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Tuft University, Medford, Massachusetts, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To prevent disease transmission, 0.05% chlorine solution is commonly recommended for handwashing in Ebola Treatment Units. In the 2014 West Africa outbreak this recommendation was widely extended to community settings, although many organizations recommend soap and hand sanitizer over chlorine. To evaluate skin irritation caused by frequent handwashing that may increase transmission risk in Ebola-affected communities, we conducted a randomized trial with 91 subjects who washed their hands 10 times a day for 28 days. Subjects used soap and water, sanitizer, or one of four chlorine solutions used by Ebola responders (calcium hypochlorite (HTH), sodium dichloroisocyanurate (NaDCC), and generated or pH-stabilized sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl)). Outcomes were self-reported hand feel, irritation as measured by the Hand Eczema Score Index (HECSI) (range 0-360), signs of transmission risk (e.g., cracking), and dermatitis diagnosis. All groups experienced statistically significant increases in HECSI score. Subjects using sanitizer had the smallest increases, followed by higher pH chlorine solutions (HTH and stabilized NaOCl), and soap and water. The greatest increases were among neutral pH chlorine solutions (NaDCC and generated NaOCl). Signs of irritation related to higher transmission risk were observed most frequently in subjects using soap and least frequently by those using sanitizer or HTH. Despite these irritation increases, all methods represented minor changes in HECSI score. Average HECSI score was only 9.10 at endline (range 1-33) and 4% (4/91) of subjects were diagnosed with dermatitis, one each in four groups. Each handwashing method has benefits and drawbacks: soap is widely available and inexpensive, but requires water and does not inactivate the virus; sanitizer is easy-to use and effective but expensive and unacceptable to many communities, and chlorine is easy-to-use but difficult to produce properly and distribute. Overall, we recommend Ebola responders and communities use whichever handwashing method(s) are most acceptable, available, and sustainable for community handwashing.

trial registrationInternational Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Registry ISRCTN89815514.

Indexed as

Practice Guidelines as TopicResidence CharacteristicsAdolescentAdultAgedDermatitisFemaleHand DisinfectionHand HygieneHemorrhagic Fever, EbolaHumansIrritantsMaleMiddle AgedSelf ReportSkinIrritants

Identifiers

PMID28030544
PMCPMC5193384

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.