Washing of gloved hands in antiseptic solution prior to central venous line insertion reduces contamination

Disinfection of gloved hands during routine care

Healthcare-associated infections are a major issue in public health. After several decades of hand hygiene programmes, it is time to admit that we have failed to achieve our goal. One of the reasons is the overuse of gloves, which is in part justified by the nature of the nursing care. Several experimental studies supported the effectiveness of disinfecting gloves, but evidence for routine feasibility and effectiveness is lacking. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of alcohol-based disinfection of gloves during nursing care. Swabs were taken from the most contaminated part of both hands at different times: T0 (before wearing gloves), T10 (after 10 minutes of nursing care) from both gloves, T10A (just after the gloves were disinfected for 30 seconds with bedside disposable hydroalcoholic solution) and when possible at T20 and T20A. After 10 minutes of nursing care, gloves were contaminated in 72.5% of cases. After alcohol-based disinfection, gloves became free of microorganism in 79.3% of cases. Alcohol-based disinfection of gloves during routine care is effective and appears to be a reasonable alternative to current recommendations.

Disinfection of gloved hands during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Disinfection of gloves can be used during a pandemic situation when performing various procedures on the same patient or when removing personal protective equipment. If performing glove disinfection, there is a need to check the compatibility of gloves with the disinfectant product used.

AIM

To test the resistance of nitrile gloves to various disinfectant solutions.

METHODS

One hundred percent powder-free nitrile gloves, composed of nitrile butadiene rubber compounds, were exposed to various disinfectants to analyse resistance. The seven most commonly used disinfectant solutions in the healthcare field were selected for testing. The effects of each disinfectant were analysed in comparison with the control group (untreated glove). For tensile testing, the thickness of each test specimen was measured with a micrometer.

FINDINGS

Bleach solution decreased the breaking load of gloves, although to a lesser extent than disinfectants that contained ethanol.

CONCLUSION

Disinfectants that contain alcohol decrease the breaking load of nitrile gloves.

Disinfection of gloved hands for multiple activities with indicated glove use on the same patient

Most hand hygiene guidelines recommend that gloves should be changed during patient care when an indication for hand disinfection occurs. Observational studies indicate that the majority of healthcare workers (HCWs) do not disinfect their hands at all during continued glove wear. The aim of this narrative review is to assess the potential benefits and risks for disinfecting gloved hands during patient care for multiple activities with indicated glove use on the same patient. Continued glove wear for multiple activities on the same patient often results in performing procedures, including aseptic procedures with contaminated gloves, especially in a setting where there are many indications in a short time, e.g. anaesthetics or accident and emergency departments. Of further note is that hand hygiene compliance is often lower when gloves are worn. To date, three independent studies have shown that decontamination is at least as effective on gloved hands as on bare hands and that puncture rates are usually not higher after up to 10 disinfections. One study on a neonatal intensive care unit showed that promotion of disinfecting gloved hands during care on the same patient resulted in a significant reduction in the incidence of late-onset infections and of necrotizing enterocolitis. We conclude that disinfection of gloved hands by HCWs may substantially reduce the risk of transmission when gloves are indicated for the entire episode of patient care and when performed during multiple activities on the same patient.

Preventing contamination at the time of central venous catheter insertion: a literature review and recommendations for clinical practice

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the evidence base and rationale underpinning the various infections control strategies during central venous catheter insertion and to promote discussion about the key, recurring concepts and recommendations in the literature. Logistical and organisational factors relating to central venous catheter insertion are also examined.

BACKGROUND

Catheter-related bloodstream infections following the insertion of central venous catheters are associated with significant patient mortality and morbidity, prolonged hospital stays and increased economic costs. Limited published literature specifically examines microbial contamination during the peri-insertion process.

METHODS

An integrative literature review supervised by a health informatics librarian was undertaken. On the basis of these data, considerations for clinical practice are provided. Retrieved articles were categorised under the following themes: risk of contamination at insertion; clinical and organisational impact of contamination; strategies for reducing contamination; controversies and challenges with decontamination strategies; recommendations for practice and implications for further research and organisational practice.

RESULTS

Specific recommendations for reducing catheter-related bloodstream infections based on recurring themes include the following: reducing microbial burden on skin prior to the central venous catheter insertion; decreasing contact of gloves and insertion equipment with the patient's skin; using specifically trained staff to prepare and maintain a sterile field; and ensuring a sterile technique is adhered to throughout the central venous catheter insertion process. The need for organisational, procedural and clinical practices to support better healthcare outcomes is demonstrated. Highlighting the importance of executive support and regular review of policy and guidelines are necessary to improve patient outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Preventing infections related to central venous catheters requires the integration of clinical, organisational and workforce factors.