A voluntary ingestion of alcohol-based hand rub

Hand Sanitizer Intoxication in the Emergency Department

Hand hygiene has always been an area of emphasis within the hospital setting, never more so than during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The consumption of alcohol-containing hand sanitizer products, whether intentional or accidental, often garners attention, particularly since these products may contain methanol. This report describes a case of surreptitious theft and intentional ingestion of the emergency department's (ED) ethanol-based hand sanitizer by a patient who presented to the ED clinically intoxicated with a high ethanol level. When the patient remained clinically intoxicated for more than 18 hours and had a rising serum ethanol level in the ED, clinicians searched his belongings and found several purloined bottles of the ED's hand sanitizer. When confronted, the patient admitted to ingesting hand sanitizer during his ED stay. This case highlights the need for clinicians to be suspicious of intentional ingestion of ethanol-containing products for at-risk patients. Additionally, it demonstrates that measures and protocols should be put in place that minimize the ability for the inappropriate use of these widely accessible products within the hospital.

Putatively lethal ingestion of isopropyl alcohol-related case: interpretation of post mortem isopropyl alcohol and acetone concentrations remains challenging

Isopropyl alcohol, or propan-2-ol (IPA), is found in numerous chemicals including alcohol-based hand rubs whose use has been recently widely extended to the general population since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. This widespread of IPA use could potentially, but not necessarily, be responsible for an increase in IPA poisoning cases (e.g., in alcoholics and/or for suicide attempt, even more in a lockdown situation). Forensic identification of IPA-related fatalities remains challenging as IPA post mortem detection can also result from antemortem or post mortem production, or post mortem contamination. In order to illustrate this issue, we report the case of a 33-year-old man found dead with a bottle of pure IPA liquid close to him. Toxicological positive results only consisted in IPA (464, 260, 465 and 991 mg/L) and acetone (1560, 2340, 3040 and 1360 mg/L) in blood, vitreous humour, urine and bile, respectively (determinations using headspace gas chromatography with flame ionization detection). These IPA absolute concentrations and IPA-to-acetone ratios appear inferior to those usually reported in the literature (higher than 1000 mg/L and 1.1, respectively) in IPA poisoning cases. In conclusion, this death can be cautiously regarded as an IPA ingestion-related fatality in the hypothesis of a survival time which have promoted IPA metabolism to acetone: this hypothesis is supported by the putative limited IPA-ingested dose. This report emphasizes the fact that post mortem IPA and acetone concentration interpretation involves to take account of (i) results in multiple biological specimens, (ii) complete case history, and (iii) a search of possible IPA presence at the scene of death.

An unnatural death by propan-1-ol and propan-2-ol

A fatality of an inpatient ingesting a disinfectant containing ethanol, propan-1-ol, and propan-2-ol is reported. The alleged survival time was about 1 h. Major findings at autopsy were an extended hemorrhagic lung edema, an edematous brain, and shock kidneys. Concentrations of alcohols and acetone, a major metabolite of propan-2-ol, were determined from body fluids (blood from the heart and the femoral vein, urine, gastric contents) and tissues (brain, muscle, liver, kidneys, lungs) by headspace/gas chromatography using 2-methylpropan-2-ol as the internal standard. All samples investigated were positive for propan-1-ol, propan-2-ol, ethanol, and acetone except stomach contents, where acetone was not detectable. The low concentration of acetone compared to propan-2-ol likely supports the short survival time. The concentration ratios estimated from the results are in accordance with the physico-chemical properties of the particular alcohols, their different affinities towards alcohol dehydrogenase as well as their interdependence during biotransformation. Autopsy did not reveal the cause of death. According to the few published data, blood concentrations of 1.44 and 1.70 mg/g of propan-2-ol and propan-1-ol, respectively, are considered sufficient to have caused the death. This case also points to the need to restrict access to antiseptic solutions containing alcohols in wards with patients at risk.

Death caused by ingestion of an ethanol-based hand sanitizer

BACKGROUND

The use of hand sanitizer is effective in preventing the transmission of disease. Many hand sanitizers are alcohol-based, and significant intoxications have occurred, often in health care facilities, including the emergency department (ED).

OBJECTIVES

We present this case to highlight potential toxicity after the ingestion of an ethanol-based hand sanitizer.

CASE REPORT

A 36-year-old man presented to the ED with ethanol intoxication. Ethanol breath analysis was measured at 278 mg/dL. After 4 h, the patient was less intoxicated and left the ED. Thirty minutes later, he was found apneic and pulseless in the ED waiting room bathroom after having ingested an ethanol-based hand sanitizer. Soon after a brief resuscitation, his serum ethanol was 526 mg/dL. He never regained consciousness and died 7 days later. No other cause of death was found.

CONCLUSION

The case highlights the potential for significant toxicity after the ingestion of a product found throughout health care facilities. Balancing the benefit of hand sanitizers for preventing disease transmission and their potential misuse remains a challenge.

The rising incidence of intentional ingestion of ethanol-containing hand sanitizers

OBJECTIVE

To describe a case of intentional ingestion of hand sanitizer in our hospital and to review published cases and those reported to the American Association of Poison Control Centers' National Poison Data System.

DESIGN

A case report, a literature review of published cases, and a query of the National Poison Data System.

SETTING

Medical intensive care unit.

PATIENT

Seventeen-yr-old male 37-kg with an intentional ingestion of a hand sanitizer product into his gastrostomy tube.

INTERVENTIONS

Intubation, ventilation, and hemodialysis.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Incidence and outcome of reported cases of unintentional and intentional ethanol containing-hand sanitizer ingestion in the United States from 2005 through 2009. A literature search found 14 detailed case reports of intentional alcohol-based hand sanitizer ingestions with one death. From 2005 to 2009, the National Poison Data System received reports of 68,712 exposures to 96 ethanol-based hand sanitizers. The number of new cases increased by an average of 1,894 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1266-2521) cases per year (p =.002). In 2005, the rate of exposures, per year, per million U.S. residents was 33.7 (95% CI 28.4-39.1); from 2005 to 2009, this rate increased on average by 5.87 per year (95% CI 3.70-8.04; p = .003). In 2005, the rate of intentional exposures, per year, per million U.S. residents, was 0.68 (95% CI 0.17-1.20); from 2005 to 2009, this rate increased on average by 0.32 per year (95% CI 0.11-0.53; p = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

The number of new cases per year of intentional hand sanitizer ingestion significantly increased during this 5-yr period. Although the majority of cases of hand sanitizer ingestion have a favorable outcome, 288 moderate and 12 major medical outcomes were reported in this National Poison Data System cohort. Increased awareness of the risks associated with intentional ingestion is warranted, particularly among healthcare providers caring for persons with a history of substance abuse, risk-taking behavior, or suicidal ideation.

Hand washing among school children in Bogotá, Colombia

OBJECTIVES

We assessed hand-washing behaviors and intentions among school children in Bogotá, Colombia, to help identify and overcome barriers to proper hygiene practices.

METHODS

Data on hand-washing behavior and intentions and individual and contextual factors were collected from 2042 sixth- through eighth-grade students in 25 schools in Bogotá via anonymous questionnaires. A member of the school administration or teaching staff completed a questionnaire about the school environment. Site inspections of bathroom facilities were conducted.

RESULTS

Only 33.6% of the sample reported always or very often washing hands with soap and clean water before eating and after using the toilet. About 7% of students reported regular access to soap and clean water at school. A high level of perceived control was the strongest predictor of positive hand-washing intentions (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]=6.0; 95% confidence interval [CI]=4.8, 7.5). Students with proper hand-washing behavior were less likely to report previous-month gastrointestinal symptoms (OR=0.8; 95% CI=0.6, 0.9) or previous-year school absenteeism (OR=0.7; 95% CI=0.6, 0.9).

CONCLUSIONS

Scarcity of adequate facilities in most schools in Bogotá prevents children from adopting proper hygienic behavior and thwarts health promotion efforts. The current renovation program of public schools in Bogotá provides a unique opportunity to meet the challenges of providing a supportive environment for adoption of healthy behaviors.