Safety and tolerability of virucidal hand rubs: a randomized, double-blind, cross-over trial with healthy volunteers

Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control

Markus Dettenkofer³  Drago Cosic¹  Claudia Schmoor²  Birgit Grotejohann²  Andreas Conrad⁴ 

[1]Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Medical Center—University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany

[2]Clinical Trials Unit, Medical Center—University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany

[3]Institut für Umweltmedizin und Krankenhaushygiene, Breisacherstr 115b, Freiburg, D-79106, Germany

[4]Institut für Krankenhaushygiene Oldenburg, Oldenburg, Germany

关键词: Skin tolerability;    Hand hygiene;    Transepidermal loss of water;    Virucidal hand rub;   

Others  :  1230968
DOI  :  10.1186/s13756-015-0079-y

 received in 2015-04-10, accepted in 2015-09-18,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

The hands of the medical staff play an important role in transmission of pathogens in the health care environment. Hand hygiene is efficient, easy to perform and cost-effective. Safety, tolerability and acceptance of hand hygiene preparations play a major role in hand hygiene compliance, and apply, in particular, to formulations with high anti-viral activity.

Aim

Clinical trial to evaluate the safety and tolerability of different virucidal hand rubs.

Methods

In a randomized, double-blind, four-period cross-over trial, healthy volunteers received three different virucidal hand rubs (P1-P3) and a reference product (R) in randomized sequence over a period of 4 days each with a washout period. The primary endpoint was skin barrier function measured by transepidermal water loss (TEWL) after application.

Results

Twenty-two subjects (seven male, 15 female; median age 25, range 21–54) were randomized and started at least one period. TEWL was 22.5; 95 %-confidence interval (CI): 19.6-25.4 after P1, 16.3; 13.5–19.1 after P2, 16.4; 13.4–19.3 after P3, and 24.0; 21.1–27.0 after R; p < 0.0001. The percentage of subjects experiencing at least one adverse event (AE) was 86 % with P1, 25 % with P2, 89 % with P3 and 56 % with R. The majority of AEs were skin reactions classified as of mild severity. No serious AEs were observed.

Conclusions

Results were inconsistent. The number of AEs was higher than expected for all products. In summary, there is room for improvement both for hand rub development and the scientific approaches taken to practically and reproducibly evaluate hand rub safety and tolerability.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Conrad et al.

【 图 表 】

Fig. 1.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Surveillance of healthcare-associated infections in Europe, 2007. ECDC, Stockholm; 2012.
• [2]Erasmus V, Daha TJ, Brug H et al.. Systematic review of studies on compliance with hand hygiene guidelines in hospital care. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2010; 31:283-294.
• [3]Dettenkofer M, Block C. Hospital disinfection: efficacy and safety issues. Curr Opin Infect Dis. 2005; 18:320-325.
• [4]Patel MM, Hall AJ, Vinjé J, Parashar UD. Noroviruses: a comprehensive review. J Clin Virol. 2009; 44:1-8.
• [5]Mattner F, Sykora KW, Meissner B, Heim A. An adenovirus type F41 outbreak in a pediatric bone marrow transplant unit: analysis of clinical impact and preventive strategies. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2008; 27:419-424.
• [6]Fretz R, Schmid D, Jelovcan S et al.. An outbreak of norovirus gastroenteritis in an Austrian hospital, winter 2006–2007. Wien Klin Wochenschr. 2009; 121:137-143.
• [7]Tupker RA, Willis C, Berardesca E et al.. Guidelines on sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) exposure tests. A report from the Standardization Group of the European Society of Contact Dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis. 1997; 37:53-69.
• [8]Pittet D, Hugonnet S, Harbarth S et al.. Effectiveness of a hospital-wide programme to improve compliance with hand hygiene. Infection control programme. Lancet. 2000; 356(9238):1307-1312.
• [9]Kampf G, Löffler H. Hand disinfection in hospitals - benefits and risks. J Dtsch Dermatol Ges. 2010; 8(12):978-983.
• [10]Pinnagoda J, Tupker RA, Agner T, Serup J. Guidelines for transepidermal loss of water (TEWL) measurement. A report from the Standardization Group of the European Society of Contact Dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis. 1990; 22:164-178.