Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-7drxs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-20T02:52:28.677Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An Approach for Selection of Health Care Personnel Handwashing Agents

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Elaine Larson  and
George H. Talbot
Elaine Larson*
Affiliation:
M. Adelaide Nutting Chair in Clinical Nursing, Johns Hopkins University, School of Nursing, Baltimore, Maryland, and the Infectious Diseases Section, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
George H. Talbot
Affiliation:
M. Adelaide Nutting Chair in Clinical Nursing, Johns Hopkins University, School of Nursing, Baltimore, Maryland, and the Infectious Diseases Section, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
*
6428 Wishbone Terrace, Cabin John, MD 20818
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Given the wide range of available health care personnel handwashing agents, selection of an appropriate product may be difficult. This decision may be made on the basis of user preference, cost, or other factors unrelated to product effectiveness. Four criteria—efficacy, safety, cost, and acceptability—are appropriate for systematic evaluation of handwashing products. These criteria are applied to para-chloro-meta-xylenol (PCMX), a compound used with increasing frequency in health care personnel handwashing agents. Published data regarding the biochemical properties, efficacy, and safety of PCMX are summarized. We conclude that the substance appears to be safe and efficacious. However, the activity of PCMX is highly formula-dependent and many of the studies available in scientific literature have been conducted in Europe using a variety of testing conditions and formulations different from those currently available in the US. Clinical studies of marketed formulations are beginning to appear in the literature. Such studies will provide the data needed for adequate product evaluation.

Type
Special Sections
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 7 , Issue 8 , August 1986 , pp. 419 - 424
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Davis, HL: Introduction: Mechanisms and evaluation of antiseptics. Ann NY Acad Sci 1950; 53:3–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Bliss, EA, Warth, PT: The effect of surface-active agents on antibiotics: An informal report. Ann NY Acad Sci 1950; 53:38–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Lawrence, CA: Mechanisms of action and neutralizing agents for surface-active materials upon microorganisms. Ann NY Acad Sci 1950; 53:66–73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Neter, E: Effect of alkyldimethylbenzalammonium chlorides (Zephiran) upon tetanus toxin. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med 1942; 51:254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Reddish, GF: Present trends in methods of testing antiseptics. Ann NY Acad Sci 1950; 53:149–162.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Sharpell, F, Manowitz, M: Preservation of cosmetics, in Block, SS (ed): Disinfection, Sterilization and Preservatives, ed 3. Philadelphia, Lea and Febiger, 1983, pp 589–607.Google Scholar
7.Slocum, GG: Antiseptics under Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Ann NY Acad Sci 1950; 53:147–148.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Bruch, MK: Methods of testing antiseptics: Antimicrobials used topically in humans, in Block, SS (ed): Disinfection, Sterilization and Preservatives, 3rd ed. Philadelphia, Lea and Febiger, 1983, pp. 946–963.Google Scholar
9.Ayliffe, GAJ, Coates, D, Hoffman, PN: Chemical disinfection in hospitals. London, Public Health Laboratory Service, 1984.Google Scholar
10.Proposed Rules. Federal Register May 23, 1982; 47: 12533–12535.Google Scholar
11.Schorr, WF: Cosmetic allergy. A comprehensive study of the many groups of chemical antimicrobial agents. Arch Dermatol 1971; 104:459–466.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Estrin, NF (ed): CTFA Cosmetic Ingredient Dictionary, ed 2. Washington DC, Cosmetic, Toiletry and Fragrance Assoc, 1977.Google Scholar
13.Gosselin, RE, Hodge, HC, Smith, RP, et al: Clinical Toxicology of Commercial Products. Baltimore, Williams and Wilkins, 1984, pp 11–194.Google Scholar
14.Sax, IN: Dangerous Properties of Industrial Materials, ed 3. New York, Reinhold Books, 1968, p 570.Google Scholar
15.Zondek, B: The excretion of halogenized phenols and their use in the treatment of urogenital infections. J Urol 1942; 48:747–758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Joubert, P, Hundt, H, DuToit, P: Severe Dettol (chloroxylenol and terpinel) poisoning. Br Med J 1978; 1:890.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17.Meek, D, Piercy, DM, Gabriel, R: Fatal self-poisoning with Dettol. Postgrad Med 1977; 53:229–231.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18.Coutselinis, A, Boukis, D: Suicidal intoxication with Dettol (chloroxylenol): A case report. Med Sci Law 1976; 16:180.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19.Windholz, M (ed): The Merck Index: An Encyclopedia of Chemicals and Drugs, ed 9. Rahway, NJ, Merck and Co., 1976.Google Scholar
20.Gucklhorn, IR: Antimicrobials in cosmetics, Part I. Manufac Chem Aerosol News 1969; 40:23–30.Google Scholar
21.Ullman, E, Thoma, K, Fickel, O: Influence of auxiliary materials on pharmaceuticals, 25. Depreciating interaction of disinfectants and preservative with non-ionogenic surfactants. III. Mechanism of the solubilization of phenols with polyethylene glycol stearates. Arch Pharmacol 1970; 303:305–309.Google Scholar
22.Ray, MD, Avis, KE, Flanigan, CC: Microbiological evaluation of PCMX complexes. J Pharmacol Sci 1968; 57:609–613.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
23.Hare, R, Raik, E, Gash, S: Efficiency of antiseptics when acting on dried organisms. Br Med J 1963; 1:496–500.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
24.Bruun, JN, Boe, J, Solberg, CO: Disinfection of the hands of ward personnel. A comparison of six disinfectants. Acta Med Scand 1968; 184:417–423.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
25.Caplin, H, Chapman, DC: A comparison of three commercially available antiseptics against opportunistic gram-negative pathogens. Microbios 1976; 16:133–138.Google ScholarPubMed
26.Ruhen, RW, de Boer, WGRM: Bactericidal action of handwashing preparations. Med J Aust 1972; 1:222–223.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
27.Van der Hoeven, E, Hinton, NA: An assessment of the prolonged effect of antiseptic scrubs on the bacterial flora of the hands. Can Med Assoc J 1968; 402–407.Google Scholar
28.Food and Drug Administration: Cosmetic product formulation data. Ingredients used in each product category. Washington DC, Food and Drug Administration, August 31, 1976.Google Scholar
29.Lowbury, EJL: Contamination of cetrimide and other fluids with Pseudomonas pyocyanea. Br J Indust Med 1951; 8:22–25.Google ScholarPubMed
30.Calman, RM, Murray, J: Antiseptics in midwifery. Br Med J 1956; 2:200–204.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
31.Anderson, K: The antibacterial activity of cleansing compounds used in South Australian hospitals. Med J Aust 1969; 56:142–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
32.Bean, HS, Farrel, RC: The persistence of Pseudomonas aeruginosa in aqueous solutions of phenols. J Pharm Pharmacol (Suppl) 1967; 19:183S–188S.Google Scholar
33.Russell, AD, Furr, JR: The antibacterial activity of a new chloroxylenol preparation containing ethylenediamine tetra-acetic acid. J Appl Bacteriol 1977; 43:253–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
34.Ayliffe, GAJ, Collins, BJ, Lowbury, EJL: Cleaning and disinfection on hospital floors. Br Med J 1966; 2:442–445.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
35.Prince, J, Deverill, CE, Ayliffe, GAJ: A membrane filter technique for testing disinfectants. J Clin Pathol 1975; 28:71–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
36.Dankert, J, Schut, IK: The antibacterial activity of chloroxylenol in combination with ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid. J Hyg (Camb) 1976; 76:11–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
37.Jacobs, G, Henry, SM, Cotty, VF: Influence of pH, emulsifier, and accelerated aging on preservative requirement of O/W (oil/water) emulsions. J Soc Cosmet Chem 1975; 26:105–117.Google Scholar
38.Koda, CF, Grubb, TC, Alexander, JF: In vitro study of antibacterial action of various chemicals on Corynebacterium acnes. J Pharm Sci 1965; 54:478–480.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
39.Brotherton, J: Relative effectiveness of different classes of fungicides against Pityrosporum ovale. Br J Dermatol 1968; 80:749–752.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
40.Sellers, RF: The inactivation of foot-and-mouth disease virus by chemicals and disinfectants. Vet Rec 1968; 83:504–506.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
41.Beath, T: The suppression of infection in recent wounds by the use of antiseptic. Surgery 1943; 13:667–676.Google Scholar
42.Colebrook, L, Maxted, WR: Antisepsis in midwifery. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of the British Empire 1933; 40:966–990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
43.Davies, J, Babbs, JR, Ayliffe, GAJ, et al: Disinfection of the skin of the abdomen. Br J Surg 1978; 65:855–858.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
44.Sheena, AZ, Stiles, ME: Efficacy of germicidal handwash agents in hygienic hand disinfection. Journal of Food Protection 1982; 45:713–720.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
45.Byatt, ME, Henderson, A: Preoperative sterilization of the perineum: A comparison of six antiseptics. J Clin Pathol 1973; 26:921–924.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
46.Ojajarvi, J: An evaluation of antiseptics used for hand disinfection in wards. J Hyg (Camb) 1976; 76:75–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
47.Maki, D, McCormick, R, Alvarado, C, Hassemer, C: Clinical evaluation of the degerming efficacy of seven agents for handwashing in hospitals. Abstract #522. Proceedings of the Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapeutics, Washington DC, 1984.Google Scholar
48.Frazer, J: The effect of two alcohol-based antiseptics on artificially contaminated skin. Microbios 1976; 3:119–122.Google Scholar
49.McBride, ME, Montes, LF, Knox, JM: The persistence and penetration of antiseptic activity. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1968; 127:270–274.Google ScholarPubMed
50.Soulsby, ME, Barnett, JB, Maddox, S: Antiseptic efficacy of chlorxylenol-containing vs. chlorhexidine gluconate-containing surgical scrub preparations. Infect Control 1986; 7:223–226.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
51.The Expert Panel of the Cosmetic Ingredient Review. Final report of the safety assessment for chloroxylenol. Cosmetic Ingredient Review, Washington DC, 1984.Google Scholar
52.Jain, PK, Gangwar, PC: Effects of storage and antibiotic treatments on developmental malformations in chickens. Indian J Exp Biol 1972; 10:319–321.Google ScholarPubMed
53.Joseph, MJ: Observations on the acute toxicity of two chlorinated phenols. Journal of the American Pharmaceutical Association 1952; 41:595–596.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
54.Archer, LNJ: Upper airway obstruction after Dettol ingestion Br Med J 1979; 2:19–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
55.Zondek, B, Shapiro, B: Fate of halogenated phenols in the organism. Biochem J 1943; 37:592–595.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
56.Roberts, MS, Anderson, RA, Swarbrick, J: Permeability of human epidermis to phenolic compounds. J Pharm Pharacol 1977; 29:677–683.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
57.Storrs, FJ: Parachloro-meta-xylenol allergic contact dermatitis in seven individuals. Contact Dermatitis 1975; 1:211–213.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
58.Marzulli, FN, Maibach, HI: Antimicrobials: Experimental contact sensitization in an. Journal of the Society of Cosmetic Chemistry 1973; 24:399–421.Google Scholar
59.Marzulli, FN, Maibach, HI: Use of graded concentration in studying skin sensitizers. Experimental contact sensitization in man. Food and Cosmetic Toxicology 1974; 12:219–227.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
60.North American Contact Dermatitis Group: Standard screening tray, 1979 versus 1980. December 4, 1980. Computer print-out.Google Scholar
61.Guess, EL: Safety evaluation of PCMX. Submitted to FDA, 1986.Google Scholar
62.FDC Reports. Drugs and Cosmetics (The Pink Sheet) vol 47. April 1,1985, p 3.Google Scholar
63.Brawley, RL, Cabezudo, I, Guenthner, SH, et al: Evaluation of handwash agents using brief contact time. Abstract #520. Proceedings of the Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapeutics, Washington DC, 1984.Google Scholar
64.Ojajarvi, J: Effectiveness of handwashing and disinfection methods in removing transient bacteria after patient nursing. J Hyg (Camb) 1980; 85:193–203.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed