FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Can Vet J / Comparison of an alcohol-based hand rub and water-based chlo...
The Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne2016; 57(2); 164-168;

Comparison of an alcohol-based hand rub and water-based chlorhexidine gluconate scrub technique for hand antisepsis prior to elective surgery in horses.

Abstract: This prospective clinical study evaluates the effectiveness of an alcohol-based hand rub (Avagard™) for pre-surgical hand antisepsis in an equine hospital and compares it with traditional scrubbing technique using 4% chlorhexidine gluconate sponges and water. Prior to elective surgery, 3 board-certified surgeons were randomly assigned to hand antisepsis with either technique. Culture samples of each hand were taken at 4 times: before and after neutral soap hand wash, after scrub or rubbing technique, and after surgery. There was no significant difference in mean bacterial colony forming units between scrub and rub techniques over the 3 time periods (P = 0.6), controlling for initial counts. One horse from the scrub group had a skin incision infection following stifle arthroscopy; this was resolved with medical treatment. The alcohol-based hand rub is equivalent in efficacy for pre-surgical hand antisepsis to traditional water-based scrubs in an equine hospital setting. Cette étude clinique prospective évalue l’efficacité d’un alcool à friction (Avagard) pour l’antisepsie des mains préalable à une chirurgie dans un hôpital équin et elle la compare à la technique de brossage traditionnelle au moyen d’éponges de gluconate de chlorhexidine 4 % et d’eau. Avant une chirurgie non urgente, trois chirurgiens agréés ont été assignés au hasard à l’antisepsie des mains avec l’une ou l’autre technique. Des échantillons de chaque main ont été prélevés quatre fois pour culture : avant et après le lavage des mains avec un savon neutre, après la technique de brossage et de friction et après la chirurgie. Il n’y avait aucune différence significative dans les moyennes des dénombrements bactériens d’unités formatrices de colonies entre les techniques de brossage et de friction pendant les trois périodes de temps ( = 0,6), en tenant compte des témoins pour les dénombrements initiaux. Un cheval du groupe de brossage a développé une infection au site de l’incision après une arthroscopie du grasset qui a été résolue par traitement médical. La friction des mains à l’alcool est équivalente, en matière d’efficacité pour l’antisepsie des mains avant la chirurgie, au brossage traditionnel à l’eau dans un milieu hospitalier équin.(Traduit par Isabelle Vallières).
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2016-02-03 PubMed ID: 26834268PubMed Central: PMC4712995
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article
  • Research Support
  • Non-U.S. Gov't

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

The study investigates the effectiveness of an alcohol-based hand rub against traditional water-based scrubbing for pre-surgical hand antisepsis in a horse hospital. It concluded that there’s no significant difference in bacterial reduction between the two methods.

Research Objectives and Methodology

  • The study was set out to determine the effectiveness of an alcohol-based hand rub called Avagard for pre-surgical hand antisepsis in an equine hospital, comparing it to the traditional procedure employing a 4% chlorhexidine gluconate sponge and water.
  • The study involved elective surgical cases, with three board-certified surgeons participating. They were randomly assigned to use either the alcohol-based hand rub or the traditional scrubbing method for hand antisepsis prior to surgery.
  • Culture samples from the surgeons’ hands were taken at four different times: before and after handwashing with neutral soap, after using either the scrubbing or rubbing technique for hand antisepsis, and after surgery.

Findings

  • The analysis found no significant difference in the average bacterial colony-forming units between the scrub and rub techniques across the three time periods, after controlling for initial counts.
  • Only one horse from the group operated by surgeons using the scrub method had a skin incision infection following stifle arthroscopy, which was resolved successfully with medical treatment.
  • Therefore, the study concluded that the alcohol-based hand rub was equivalent to the traditional scrub in terms of efficacy for pre-surgical hand antisepsis in an equine hospital setting.

Implications

  • These findings are significant as they provide evidence supporting the use of alcohol-based hand rubs for surgeons in an equine hospital setting. The study may contribute to the replacement or complement of traditional water-based scrubs with alcohol-based hand rubs.
  • It could also positively influence surgical preparation protocols, reducing dependency on water and sponges, thus potentially reducing costs, environmental impact, and bacterial contamination risks.

Cite This Article

APA
da Silveira EA, Bubeck KA, Batista ER, Piat P, Laverty S, Beauchamp G, Archambault M, Elce Y. (2016). Comparison of an alcohol-based hand rub and water-based chlorhexidine gluconate scrub technique for hand antisepsis prior to elective surgery in horses. Can Vet J, 57(2), 164-168.

Publication

The Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne
ISSN: 0008-5286
NlmUniqueID: 0004653
Country: Canada
Language: English
Volume: 57
Issue: 2
Pages: 164-168

Researcher Affiliations

da Silveira, Eduardo Almeida
  • Department of Clinical Sciences (da Silveira, Piat, Laverty, Elce), Department of Microbiology and Bacteriology (Archambault), Department of Pathology (Beauchamp), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Montreal, St. Hyacinthe, Q J2S 7C6; Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine, 200 Westboro Road, North Grafton, Massachusetts 01536, USA (Bubeck); MAPAQ-LEPAQ-2, 2650, rue Einstein, Q, Q G1P 4S8 (Batista).
Bubeck, Kirstin A
  • Department of Clinical Sciences (da Silveira, Piat, Laverty, Elce), Department of Microbiology and Bacteriology (Archambault), Department of Pathology (Beauchamp), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Montreal, St. Hyacinthe, Q J2S 7C6; Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine, 200 Westboro Road, North Grafton, Massachusetts 01536, USA (Bubeck); MAPAQ-LEPAQ-2, 2650, rue Einstein, Q, Q G1P 4S8 (Batista).
Batista, Edisleidy Rodriguez
  • Department of Clinical Sciences (da Silveira, Piat, Laverty, Elce), Department of Microbiology and Bacteriology (Archambault), Department of Pathology (Beauchamp), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Montreal, St. Hyacinthe, Q J2S 7C6; Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine, 200 Westboro Road, North Grafton, Massachusetts 01536, USA (Bubeck); MAPAQ-LEPAQ-2, 2650, rue Einstein, Q, Q G1P 4S8 (Batista).
Piat, Perrine
  • Department of Clinical Sciences (da Silveira, Piat, Laverty, Elce), Department of Microbiology and Bacteriology (Archambault), Department of Pathology (Beauchamp), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Montreal, St. Hyacinthe, Q J2S 7C6; Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine, 200 Westboro Road, North Grafton, Massachusetts 01536, USA (Bubeck); MAPAQ-LEPAQ-2, 2650, rue Einstein, Q, Q G1P 4S8 (Batista).
Laverty, Sheila
  • Department of Clinical Sciences (da Silveira, Piat, Laverty, Elce), Department of Microbiology and Bacteriology (Archambault), Department of Pathology (Beauchamp), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Montreal, St. Hyacinthe, Q J2S 7C6; Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine, 200 Westboro Road, North Grafton, Massachusetts 01536, USA (Bubeck); MAPAQ-LEPAQ-2, 2650, rue Einstein, Q, Q G1P 4S8 (Batista).
Beauchamp, Guy
  • Department of Clinical Sciences (da Silveira, Piat, Laverty, Elce), Department of Microbiology and Bacteriology (Archambault), Department of Pathology (Beauchamp), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Montreal, St. Hyacinthe, Q J2S 7C6; Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine, 200 Westboro Road, North Grafton, Massachusetts 01536, USA (Bubeck); MAPAQ-LEPAQ-2, 2650, rue Einstein, Q, Q G1P 4S8 (Batista).
Archambault, Marie
  • Department of Clinical Sciences (da Silveira, Piat, Laverty, Elce), Department of Microbiology and Bacteriology (Archambault), Department of Pathology (Beauchamp), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Montreal, St. Hyacinthe, Q J2S 7C6; Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine, 200 Westboro Road, North Grafton, Massachusetts 01536, USA (Bubeck); MAPAQ-LEPAQ-2, 2650, rue Einstein, Q, Q G1P 4S8 (Batista).
Elce, Yvonne
  • Department of Clinical Sciences (da Silveira, Piat, Laverty, Elce), Department of Microbiology and Bacteriology (Archambault), Department of Pathology (Beauchamp), Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Montreal, St. Hyacinthe, Q J2S 7C6; Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine, 200 Westboro Road, North Grafton, Massachusetts 01536, USA (Bubeck); MAPAQ-LEPAQ-2, 2650, rue Einstein, Q, Q G1P 4S8 (Batista).

MeSH Terms

  • Animals
  • Antisepsis / methods
  • Bacteria / drug effects
  • Bacteria / isolation & purification
  • Chlorhexidine / analogs & derivatives
  • Chlorhexidine / pharmacology
  • Colony Count, Microbial
  • Ethanol / pharmacology
  • Hand / microbiology
  • Hand Disinfection
  • Horse Diseases / microbiology
  • Horse Diseases / prevention & control
  • Horses
  • Humans
  • Preoperative Period
  • Surgical Wound Infection / prevention & control
  • Surgical Wound Infection / veterinary

References

This article includes 31 references
  1. Stick JA. Preparation of the surgical patient, the surgery facility, and the operating team. In: Auer JA, Stick JA, editors. Equine Surgery. 4th ed. St. Louis, Missouri: Elsevier Saunders; 2012. pp. 111–122.
  2. Wan PY, Blackford JT, Bemis DA, Rohrbach BW, Knoll DE, Provenza MK. Evaluation of surgical scrub methods for large animal surgeons.. Vet Surg 1997 Sep-Oct;26(5):382-5.
    pubmed: 9381663doi: 10.1111/j.1532-950x.1997.tb01697.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  3. Verwilghen DR, Mainil J, Mastrocicco E, Hamaide A, Detilleux J, van Galen G, Serteyn D, Grulke S. Surgical hand antisepsis in veterinary practice: evaluation of soap scrubs and alcohol based rub techniques.. Vet J 2011 Dec;190(3):372-7.
    pubmed: 21316990doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2010.12.020google scholar: lookup
  4. Verwilghen D, Grulke S, Kampf G. Presurgical hand antisepsis: concepts and current habits of veterinary surgeons.. Vet Surg 2011 Jul;40(5):515-21.
    pubmed: 21736594doi: 10.1111/j.1532-950x.2011.00846.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  5. Larson EL, Hughes CA, Pyrek JD, Sparks SM, Cagatay EU, Bartkus JM. Changes in bacterial flora associated with skin damage on hands of health care personnel.. Am J Infect Control 1998 Oct;26(5):513-21.
    pubmed: 9795681doi: 10.1016/s0196-6553(98)70025-2google scholar: lookup
  6. Eklund AM, Ojajärvi J, Laitinen K, Valtonen M, Werkkala KA. Glove punctures and postoperative skin flora of hands in cardiac surgery.. Ann Thorac Surg 2002 Jul;74(1):149-53.
    pubmed: 12118748doi: 10.1016/s0003-4975(02)03690-1google scholar: lookup
  7. Yinusa W, Li YH, Chow W, Ho WY, Leong JC. Glove punctures in orthopaedic surgery.. Int Orthop 2004 Feb;28(1):36-9.
    pmc: PMC3466585pubmed: 14534831doi: 10.1007/s00264-003-0510-5google scholar: lookup
  8. Tanner J, Swarbrook S, Stuart J. Surgical hand antisepsis to reduce surgical site infection.. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008 Jan 23;(1):CD004288.
    pubmed: 18254046doi: 10.1002/14651858.cd004288.pub2google scholar: lookup
  9. Burch TM, Stanger B, Mizuguchi KA, Zurakowski D, Reid SD. Is alcohol-based hand disinfection equivalent to surgical scrub before placing a central venous catheter?. Anesth Analg 2012 Mar;114(3):622-5.
    pubmed: 22190557doi: 10.1213/ane.0b013e31824083b8google scholar: lookup
  10. Kampf G, Widmer AF. Scrub or rub? What is best practice for hand hygiene before surgery?. Vet J 2011 Dec;190(3):307-8.
    pubmed: 21440470doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2011.02.001google scholar: lookup
  11. Girou E, Loyeau S, Legrand P, Oppein F, Brun-Buisson C. Efficacy of handrubbing with alcohol based solution versus standard handwashing with antiseptic soap: randomised clinical trial.. BMJ 2002 Aug 17;325(7360):362.
    pmc: PMC117885pubmed: 12183307doi: 10.1136/bmj.325.7360.362google scholar: lookup
  12. Pereira LJ, Lee GM, Wade KJ. An evaluation of five protocols for surgical handwashing in relation to skin condition and microbial counts.. J Hosp Infect 1997 May;36(1):49-65.
    pubmed: 9172045doi: 10.1016/s0195-6701(97)90090-6google scholar: lookup
  13. Olson LK, Morse DJ, Duley C, Savell BK. Prospective, randomized in vivo comparison of a dual-active waterless antiseptic versus two alcohol-only waterless antiseptics for surgical hand antisepsis.. Am J Infect Control 2012 Mar;40(2):155-9.
    pubmed: 22381223doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2011.10.012google scholar: lookup
  14. Weight CJ, Lee MC, Palmer JS. Avagard hand antisepsis vs. traditional scrub in 3600 pediatric urologic procedures.. Urology 2010 Jul;76(1):15-7.
    pubmed: 20363495doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2010.01.017google scholar: lookup
  15. Jehle K, Jarrett N, Matthews S. Clean and green: saving water in the operating theatre.. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2008 Jan;90(1):22-4.
    pmc: PMC2216709pubmed: 18201493doi: 10.1308/003588408x242277google scholar: lookup
  16. . WHO Guidelines on Hand Hygiene in Health Care. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO; 2009. p. 270.
  17. Löffler H, Kampf G. Hand disinfection: how irritant are alcohols?. J Hosp Infect 2008 Oct;70 Suppl 1:44-8.
    pubmed: 18994681doi: 10.1016/s0195-6701(08)60010-9google scholar: lookup
  18. Kampf G, Wigger-Alberti W, Schoder V, Wilhelm KP. Emollients in a propanol-based hand rub can significantly decrease irritant contact dermatitis.. Contact Dermatitis 2005 Dec;53(6):344-9.
    pubmed: 16364124doi: 10.1111/j.0105-1873.2005.00727.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  19. Boyce JM, Kelliher S, Vallande N. Skin irritation and dryness associated with two hand-hygiene regimens: soap-and-water hand washing versus hand antisepsis with an alcoholic hand gel.. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2000 Jul;21(7):442-8.
    pubmed: 10926393doi: 10.1086/501785google scholar: lookup
  20. Corder K, Knowles TG, Holt PE. Factors affecting bacterial counts during preparation of the hands for aseptic surgery.. Vet Rec 2007 Jun 30;160(26):897-901.
    pubmed: 17602105doi: 10.1136/vr.160.26.897google scholar: lookup
  21. Pittet D, Allegranzi B, Boyce J. The World Health Organization Guidelines on Hand Hygiene in Health Care and their consensus recommendations.. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2009 Jul;30(7):611-22.
    pubmed: 19508124doi: 10.1086/600379google scholar: lookup
  22. Chen CF, Han CL, Kan CP, Chen SG, Hung PW. Effect of surgical site infections with waterless and traditional hand scrubbing protocols on bacterial growth.. Am J Infect Control 2012 May;40(4):e15-7.
    pubmed: 22305412doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2011.09.008google scholar: lookup
  23. Suchomel M, Koller W, Kundi M, Rotter ML. Surgical hand rub: Influence of duration of application on the immediate and 3-hours effects of n-propanol and isopropanol.. Am J Infect Control 2009 May;37(4):289-93.
    pubmed: 19188002doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2008.09.026google scholar: lookup
  24. Suchomel M, Kundi M, Allegranzi B, Pittet D, Rotter ML. Testing of the World Health Organization-recommended formulations for surgical hand preparation and proposals for increased efficacy.. J Hosp Infect 2011 Oct;79(2):115-8.
    pubmed: 21741115doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2011.05.005google scholar: lookup
  25. Kampf G, Ostermeyer C. World Health Organization-recommended hand-rub formulations do not meet European efficacy requirements for surgical hand disinfection in five minutes.. J Hosp Infect 2011 Jun;78(2):123-7.
    pubmed: 21450366doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2011.02.005google scholar: lookup
  26. Kampf G, Ostermeyer C, Kohlmann T. Bacterial population kinetics on hands during 2 consecutive surgical hand disinfection procedures.. Am J Infect Control 2008 Jun;36(5):369-74.
    pubmed: 18538704doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2007.09.009google scholar: lookup
  27. Kac G, Masmejean E, Gueneret M, Rodi A, Peyrard S, Podglajen I. Bactericidal efficacy of a 1.5min surgical hand-rubbing protocol under in-use conditions.. J Hosp Infect 2009 Jun;72(2):135-9.
    pubmed: 19380177doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2009.02.015google scholar: lookup
  28. Suchomel M, Rotter M, Weinlich M, Kundi M. Glycerol significantly decreases the three hour efficacy of alcohol-based surgical hand rubs.. J Hosp Infect 2013 Apr;83(4):284-7.
    pubmed: 23433581doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2012.11.030google scholar: lookup
  29. Kampf G, Reichel M, Hollingsworth A, Bashir M. Efficacy of surgical hand scrub products based on chlorhexidine is largely overestimated without neutralizing agents in the sampling fluid.. Am J Infect Control 2013 Jan;41(1):e1-5.
    pubmed: 23287283doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2012.07.018google scholar: lookup
  30. Tredget EE, Shankowsky HA, Joffe AM, Inkson TI, Volpel K, Paranchych W, Kibsey PC, Alton JD, Burke JF. Epidemiology of infections with Pseudomonas aeruginosa in burn patients: the role of hydrotherapy.. Clin Infect Dis 1992 Dec;15(6):941-9.
    pubmed: 1457665doi: 10.1093/clind/15.6.941google scholar: lookup
  31. Blanc DS, Nahimana I, Petignat C, Wenger A, Bille J, Francioli P. Faucets as a reservoir of endemic Pseudomonas aeruginosa colonization/infections in intensive care units.. Intensive Care Med 2004 Oct;30(10):1964-8.
    pubmed: 15257431doi: 10.1007/s00134-004-2389-zgoogle scholar: lookup

Citations

This article has been cited 5 times.
  1. Saveanu CI, Anistoroaei D, Todireasa S, Saveanu AE, Bobu LI, Bamboi I, Boronia O, Balcos C. Evaluation of the Efficiency of Hand Hygiene Technique with Hydroalcoholic Solution by Image Color Summarize. Medicina (Kaunas) 2022 Aug 16;58(8).
    doi: 10.3390/medicina58081108pubmed: 36013575google scholar: lookup
  2. Hankenson FC, Kim JJ, Le TM, Lawrence FR, Del Valle JM. Using Waterless Alcohol-based Antiseptic for Skin Preparation and Active Thermal Support in Laboratory Rats. J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci 2021 May 1;60(3):365-373.
    doi: 10.30802/AALAS-JAALAS-20-000128pubmed: 33952387google scholar: lookup
  3. Isola M, Piccinotti C, Magro M, Fasolato L, Vianello F, Menandro ML, Memarian P, Rossi M, Falomo ME. Colloidal Iron Oxide Formulation for Equine Hoof Disinfection. Animals (Basel) 2021 Mar 10;11(3).
    doi: 10.3390/ani11030766pubmed: 33801981google scholar: lookup
  4. Rocktäschel T, Renner-Martin K, Cuny C, Brehm W, Truyen U, Speck S. Surgical hand preparation in an equine hospital: Comparison of general practice with a standardised protocol and characterisation of the methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus recovered. PLoS One 2020;15(12):e0242961.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0242961pubmed: 33351819google scholar: lookup
  5. Del Valle JM, Fisk EA, Noland EL, Pak D, Zhang J, Crim MJ, Lawrence FR, Hankenson FC. Comparison of Aqueous and Alcohol-based Agents for Presurgical Skin Preparation Methods in Mice. J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci 2018 Jul 1;57(4):401-414.
    doi: 10.30802/AALAS-JAALAS-17-000128pubmed: 29970215google scholar: lookup
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,006 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.