Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wzw2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-27T04:26:45.841Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rapid Antibacterial Activity of 2 Novel Hand Soaps: Evaluation of the Risk of Development of Bacterial Resistance to the Antibacterial Agents

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Ingrid M. Geraldo ,
Allan Gilman ,
Milind S. Shintre  and
Shanta M. Modak
Ingrid M. Geraldo
Affiliation:
Department of Surgery, Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, New York
Allan Gilman
Affiliation:
Department of Surgery, Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, New York
Milind S. Shintre
Affiliation:
Department of Surgery, Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, New York
Shanta M. Modak*
Affiliation:
Department of Surgery, Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, New York
*
Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, Department of Surgery, 630 West 168th Street, New York, NY 10032 (smm4@columbia.edu.)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective.

To evaluate the antimicrobial efficacy of and risk of organisms developing resistance to 2 novel hand soaps: (1) a soap containing triclosan, polyhexamethylene biguanide, and benzethonium chloride added to a soap base (TPB soap); and (2) a soap containing farnesol, polyhexamethylene biguanide, and benzethonium chloride added to a soap base (FPB soap). Tests also included soaps containing only triclosan.

Design.

The risk of emergence of resistant bacterial mutants was investigated by determining the susceptibility changes after repeated exposure of bacteria to the drugs and soaps in vitro. The effectiveness of the soaps was evaluated using an in vitro tube dilution method, a volunteer method (the ASTM standard), and 2 pig skin methods.

Results.

The minimum inhibitory concentration and minimum bactericidal concentration of triclosan against Staphylococcus, aureus increased 8- to 62.5-fold, whereas those of TPB and FPB (both alone and in soap) were unchanged. In vitro, TPB and FPB soaps produced higher log10 reductions in colony-forming units of all tested organisms (4.95-8.58) than did soaps containing triclosan alone (0.29-4.86). In the test using the pig skin and volunteer methods, TPB soap produced a higher log10 reduction in colony-forming units (3.1-3.3) than did the soap containing triclosan alone (2.6-2.8).

Conclusion.

The results indicate that TPB and FPB soaps may provide superior rapid and broad-spectrum efficacy with a lower risk of organisms developing resistance than do soaps containing triclosan alone. Pig skin methods may be used to predict the efficacy of antibacterial soaps in the rapid disinfection of contaminated hands. Hand washing with TPB and FPB soaps by healthcare workers and the general population may reduce the transmission of pathogens, with a lower risk of promoting the emergence of resistant organisms.

Type
Original Article
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 29 , Issue 8 , August 2008 , pp. 736 - 741
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 2008

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.Boyce, JM, Pittet, D. Guideline for hand hygiene in health-care settings. Recommendations of the Healthcare Infection control Practices Advisory Committee and the HIPAC/SHEA/APIC/IDSA hand hygiene task force. Am J Infect Control 2002;30:S1-S46.Google Scholar
2.Larson, EL. APIC guideline for handwashing and hand antisepsis in health care settings. Am J Infect Control 1995;23:251–269.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Conly, JM, Hill, S, Ross, J, Lertzman, J, Louie, TJ. Handwashing practices in an intensive care unit: the effects of an educational program and its relationship to infection rates. Am J Infect Control 1989;17:330–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Larson, EL, Kretzer, EK. Compliance with handwashing and barrier precautions. J Hosp Infection 1995;30(Suppl):88–106.Google Scholar
5.Pittet, D, Mourouga, P, Perneger, TV, Members of the Infection Control Program. Compliance with handwashing in a teaching hospital. Ann Intern Med 1999;130:126–130.Google Scholar
6.Pittet, D. Improving adherence to hand hygiene practice: a multidisciplinary approach. Emerg Infect Dis 2001;7:234–240.Google Scholar
7.Rotter, ML. Arguments for alcoholic hand disinfection. J Hosp Infect 2001;48:S4-S8.Google Scholar
8.Siegel, JD, Rhinehart, E, Jackson, M, Chiarello, L, Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. Guideline for isolation precautions: preventing transmission of infectious agents in healthcare settings 2007. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dhqp/gl_isolation.html. Accessed May 21, 2008.Google Scholar
9.Garner, JS, Favero, MS. CDC guideline for handwashing and hospital environmental control 1985. Infect Control 1986;7:231–243.Google Scholar
10.Levy, SB. Antibacterial household products: cause for concern. Emerg Infect Dis 2001;7(Suppl 3):512–515.Google Scholar
11.Perencevich, EN, Wong, MT, Harris, AD. National and regional assessment of the antibacterial soap market: a step toward determining the impact of prevalent antibacterial soaps. Am J Infect Control 2001;29:281–283.Google Scholar
12.Modak, S, Gaonkar, TA, Shintre, M, Sampath, L, Caraos, L, Geraldo, I. A topical cream containing a zinc gel (Allergy Guard) as a prophylactic against latex glove-related contact dermatitis. Dermatitis 2005;16:22–27.Google Scholar
13.Shintre, MS, Gaonkar, TA, Modak, SM. Efficacy of an alcohol-based healthcare hand rub containing synergistic combination of farnesol and benze-thonium chloride. Int J Hyg Environ Health 2006;209:477–487.Google Scholar
14.ASTM International. E1054-02: standard test methods for evaluation of inactivators of antimicrobial agents. 2002 Annual Book of ASTM Standards, vol. 11.05. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International; 2002.Google Scholar
15.Tambe, SM. Sampath, L, Modak, SM. In vitro evaluation of the risk of developing bacterial resistance to antiseptics and antibiotics used in medical devices. J Antimicrob Chemother 2001;47:589–598.Google Scholar
16.ASTM International. E1174-06: standard test method for evaluation of the effectiveness of health care personnel handwash formulations. 2006 Annual Book of ASTM Standards, vol. 11.05. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International; 2006.Google Scholar
17.Gaonkar, TA, Geraldo, I, Caraos, L, Modak, SM. An alcohol hand rub containing a synergistic combination of an emollient and preservatives: prolonged activity against transient pathogens. J Hosp Infect 2005;59:12–18.Google Scholar
18.McFarland, LV, Mulligan, ME, Kwok, RY, Stamm, WE. Nosocomial acquisition of Clostridium difficile infection. N Engl J Med 1989;320:204–210.Google Scholar
19.Sickbert-Bennett, EE, Weber, DJ, Gergen-Teague, MT, Sobsey, MD, Samsa, GP, Rutala, WA. Comparative efficacy of hand hygiene agents in the reduction of bacteria and viruses. Am J Infect Control 2005;33:67–77.Google Scholar
20.Sunenshine, RH, McDonald, LC. Clostridium difficile-associated disease: new challenges from an established pathogen. Cleve Clin J Med 2006;73:187–197.Google Scholar
21.Ehrenkranz, NJ, Alfonso, BC. Failure of bland soap handwash to prevent hand transfer of patient bacteria to urethral catheters. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1991;12:654–662.Google Scholar
22.Sartor, C, Jacomo, V, Duvivier, C, Tissot-Dupont, H, Sambuc, R, Drancourt, M. Nosocomial Serratia marcescens infections associated with extrinsic contamination of a liquid non-medicated soap. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2000;21:1996–1999.Google Scholar
23.Faoagali, J, Fong, J, George, N, Mahoney, P, O'Rourke, V. Comparison of the immediate, residual, and cumulative antibacterial effects of Novaderm R, Novascrub R, Betadine Surgical Scrub, Hibiclens, and liquid soap. Am J Infect Control 1995;23:337–343.Google Scholar
24.Messager, S, Hann, AC, Goddard, PA, Dettmar, PW, Maillard, JY. Use of the 'ex vivo' test to study long-term bacterial survival on human skin and their sensitivity to antisepsis. J Appl Microbiol 2004;97:1149–1160.Google Scholar
25.Drankiewicz, D, Dundes, L. Handwashing among female college students. Am J Infect Control 2003;31:67–71.Google Scholar