| Title |
Evaluation of antimicrobial persistent activity of alcohol-based hand antiseptics against bacterial contamination
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10096-017-2908-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
R. M. López-Gigosos, E. Mariscal-López, M. Gutierrez-Bedmar, A. García-Rodriguez, A. Mariscal |
| Abstract |
The purpose of this study was to evaluate persistent activity of three alcohol-based antiseptics widely used in the clinical routine containing chlorhexidine, triclosan or mecetronium after hand disinfection. Four tests were used to evaluate the antimicrobial activity of antiseptics on: (i) resident microbiota; (ii) nutrient agar plates (NAP) subsequently inoculated with a test organism; and transient microbiota acquired by contact with dry hands (iii), or (iv) a wet inert surface that had been artificially contaminated. Four reference strains (Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus epidermidis) and an Acinetobacter baumannii strain responsible for a hospital outbreak were used as transient microbiota. Antimicrobial activity was calculated according to the CFUs reduction by reference to non-disinfected control hands. The antiseptics were applied according to European Standard EN1500. Solutions containing chlorhexidine or triclosan showed some persistent effects on transient microbiota on inert humid surfaces and NAP, but not on contaminated dry hands. Solutions containing mecetronium showed no persistent effect on transient flora in any of the trials. All alcohol-based antiseptics tested were more effective against resident flora than soap. No persistent activity was observed for A. baumannii in any of the trials. Chlorhexidine and triclosan are preferred when an antiseptic with persistent activity is desired, but a moist environment appears to be necessary for that antibacterial activity. Accordingly, relevant conclusions regarding the persistent activity of antiseptics for clinical practice and protection against bacterial contamination cannot be derived from this study for the alcoholic solutions tested. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 51 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 14% |
| Researcher | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 10% |
| Professor | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 9 | 18% |
| Unknown | 11 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 18% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 10% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 4 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 6% |
| Engineering | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 13 | 25% |
| Unknown | 14 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 March 2023.
All research outputs
#2,755,283
of 23,485,204 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases
#191
of 2,830 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,070
of 422,298 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases
#9
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,485,204 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,830 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 422,298 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.