5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Skin antiseptics in healthcare facilities: is a targeted approach necessary?

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Skin antisepsis occurs in every healthcare environment. From basic hand hygiene, to antiseptic bathing and pre surgical care with alcohol/chlorhexidine, use of antimicrobial agents to reduce the skin microflora has skyrocketed in the past several years. Although used in hopes of reducing the likelihood of infection in patients, many products have been identified as the source of infection in several outbreaks, sometimes due to the nonsterile nature of the many readily available antiseptics.

          Body

          Intrinsic contamination of antiseptics during the manufacturing process is common. In fact, since the majority of these products are sold as nonsterile, they are allowed some level of microbial contamination based on the United States Pharmacopeia documents 61 and 62. Unfortunately, sometimes this contamination is with microorganisms resistant to the antiseptic and/or with those pathogenic to humans. In this scenario, healthcare-associated infections may occur, leaving the patient at higher risk of mortality and increasing costs of care substantially. Although antibiotic stewardship programs throughout the world suggest targeting use of antibiotics to limit resistance, few healthcare environments include other antimicrobial agents (such as antiseptics) in their programs.

          Conclusion

          Due to the potential for contamination with pathogenic organisms and the increased likelihood of selecting for resistant organisms with widespread use of broad-spectrum agents with non-specific mechanisms of action, a discussion around including skin antiseptics in stewardship programs is necessary, particularly those labeled as nonsterile. At minimum, debating the pros and cons of targeting use of daily antiseptic bathing in hospitalized patients should occur. Through mindfully incorporating any antimicrobial agent, sterile or not, into our repertoire of anti-infectives, we can save patient lives, reduce infection, and save costs.

          Related collections

          Most cited references22

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Outbreaks associated with contaminated antiseptics and disinfectants.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Effectiveness of chlorhexidine bathing to reduce catheter-associated bloodstream infections in medical intensive care unit patients.

            To determine whether patients bathed daily with chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) have a lower incidence of primary bloodstream infections (BSIs) compared with patients bathed with soap and water. The study design was a 52-week, 2-arm, crossover (ie, concurrent control group) clinical trial with intention-to-treat analysis. The study setting was the 22-bed medical intensive care unit (MICU), which comprises 2 geographically separate, similar 11-bed units, of the John H. Stroger Jr (Cook County) Hospital, a 464-bed public teaching hospital in Chicago, Illinois. The study population comprised 836 MICU patients. During the first of 2 study periods (28 weeks), 1 hospital unit was randomly selected to serve as the intervention unit in which patients were bathed daily with 2% CHG-impregnated washcloths (Sage 2% CHG cloths; Sage Products Inc, Cary, Illinois); patients in the concurrent control unit were bathed daily with soap and water. After a 2-week wash-out period at the end of the first period, cleansing methods were crossed over for 24 more weeks. Main outcome measures included incidences of primary BSIs and clinical (culture-negative) sepsis (primary outcomes) and incidences of other infections (secondary outcomes). Patients in the CHG intervention arm were significantly less likely to acquire a primary BSI (4.1 vs 10.4 infections per 1000 patient days; incidence difference, 6.3 [95% confidence interval, 1.2-11.0). The incidences of other infections, including clinical sepsis, were similar between the units. Protection against primary BSI by CHG cleansing was apparent after 5 or more days in the MICU. Daily cleansing of MICU patients with CHG-impregnated cloths is a simple, effective strategy to decrease the rate of primary BSIs.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Microbial ecology of the skin in the era of metagenomics and molecular microbiology.

              The skin is the primary physical barrier between the body and the external environment and is also a substrate for the colonization of numerous microbes. Previously, dermatological microbiology research was dominated by culture-based techniques, but significant advances in genomic technologies have enabled the development of less-biased, culture-independent approaches to characterize skin microbial communities. These molecular microbiology approaches illustrate the great diversity of microbiota colonizing the skin and highlight unique features such as site specificity, temporal dynamics, and interpersonal variation. Disruptions in skin commensal microbiota are associated with the progression of many dermatological diseases. A greater understanding of how skin microbes interact with each other and with their host, and how we can therapeutically manipulate those interactions, will provide powerful tools for treating and preventing dermatological disease.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                314-977-1199 , timothy.wiemken@health.slu.edu
                Journal
                BMC Public Health
                BMC Public Health
                BMC Public Health
                BioMed Central (London )
                1471-2458
                22 August 2019
                22 August 2019
                2019
                : 19
                : 1158
                Affiliations
                ISNI 0000 0004 1936 9342, GRID grid.262962.b, Center for Health Outcomes Research, , Saint Louis University, ; 3545 Lafayette Ave, #411, St. Louis, MO 63108 USA
                Article
                7507
                10.1186/s12889-019-7507-5
                6705093
                31438910
                5a184b1c-53bb-4dee-ade2-d32ed255f3d3
                © The Author(s). 2019

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 4 June 2019
                : 15 August 2019
                Funding
                Funded by: Relion Manufacturing
                Award ID: 1
                Categories
                Debate
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2019

                Public health
                antisepsis,bathing,chlorhexidine,surgical preparation,healthcare-associated infection,antimicrobial stewardship

                Comments

                Comment on this article