Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32728325›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine2020

Comparative Efficacy of Hand Disinfection Potential of Hand Sanitizer and Liquid Soap among Dental Students: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Mahesh R Khairnar, Anitha G, Tanushri M Dalvi, Shrivardhan Kalghatgi, Uma V Datar, Umesh Wadgave, Shrushti Shah, Lucky Preet

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 39% 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.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mahesh R KhairnarDepartment of Public Health Dentistry, Bharati Vidyapeeth (Deemed to be University) Dental College and Hospital, Sangli, Maharashtra, India.
Anitha GDepartment of Periodontology, ESIC Dental College, Gulbarga, Karnataka, India.
Tanushri M DalviDepartment of Public Health Dentistry, Bharati Vidyapeeth (Deemed to be University) Dental College and Hospital, Sangli, Maharashtra, India.
Shrivardhan KalghatgiDepartment of Public Health Dentistry, Bharati Vidyapeeth (Deemed to be University) Dental College and Hospital, Sangli, Maharashtra, India.
Uma V DatarDepartment of Oral Pathology and Microbiology, Bharati Vidyapeeth (Deemed to be University) Dental College and Hospital, Sangli, Maharashtra, India.
Umesh WadgaveDepartment of Public Health Dentistry, ESIC Dental College, Gulbarga, Karnataka, India.
Shrushti ShahDepartment of Public Health Dentistry, Bharati Vidyapeeth (Deemed to be University) Dental College and Hospital, Sangli, Maharashtra, India.
Lucky PreetDepartment of Public Health Dentistry, Bharati Vidyapeeth (Deemed to be University) Dental College and Hospital, Sangli, Maharashtra, India.
Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed University · INESIC Hospital · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHands are the most common medium for initiation and spread of infection in clinics. Hand hygiene is the simplest and most economic method for reducing the healthcare-associated infections (HCAIs).

aimThe aim of the present study was to compare the efficacy of hand sanitizer, liquid soap, and their combination for reducing the microbial colonies on hands. MATERIALS AND

methodsThe study was a single-blinded randomized controlled trial executed in a dental college on 90 participants, which were randomly assigned into three intervention groups of 30 each. The participants were instructed to contaminate their hands followed by a hand hygiene protocol for the liquid hand-wash group, the alcohol-based hand sanitizer (ABHS) group, and the combination group according to WHO guidelines. The swabs were collected pre- and post-intervention and mean colony-forming units were determined for each group.

resultsMedian percentage reduction was highest for the combination group (100%), followed by the ABHS group (94.29%) and lowest for the liquid soap (92.31%). This difference in the amount of colony-forming units (CFU) among all the groups was nonsignificant (

conclusionThe results of the study show that there was no significant difference in hand disinfection potential among hand sanitizer, liquid soap, or their combination. All the three interventions were equally effective with the reduction of total bacterial contamination from participants' hands. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Khairnar MR, Anitha G, Dalvi TM, Kalghatgi S, Datar UV, Wadgave U,

Indexed as

Antibacterial agentsHand hygieneHand sanitizersRandomized controlled trial.

Identifiers

PMID32728325
PMCPMC7358852
OpenAlexW3037000047

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.