IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/nuhsci/v16y2014i2p179-185.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Antibacterial effects on dry‐fast and traditional water‐based surgical scrubbing methods: A two‐time points experimental study

Author

Listed:
  • Shu‐Hwa Chen
  • Chuan‐Yu Chou
  • Jui‐Chen Huang
  • Ya‐Fen Tang
  • Yur‐Ren Kuo
  • Li‐Yu Chien

Abstract

This study determined the in‐use effects of dry‐fast and traditional hand‐washing surgical scrubs among operating room staff members. This is a static group comparison study with purposive sampling. A total of 156 staff members were recruited in an operating room in a medical center located in southern Taiwan. The participants were divided into traditional and dry‐fast hand‐washing groups. Microbial counts were measured right after the two groups finished surgical scrubbing and at the completion of surgery. The results showed that the use of dry‐fast antisepsis has a better persistent effect (P = 0.001), more nurses chose dry‐fast antisepsis than surgeons (P = 0.012), and the post‐operation number of colonies for nurses was significantly higher than that for surgeons (P = 0.003). Operating room nurses are long‐term and frequent users of antibacterial agents, and their requirement of skin protection is higher. The dry‐fast technique has the advantage of being less irritating to the skin and less time consuming; therefore, brush‐free and dry‐fast antisepsis is recommended.

Suggested Citation

  • Shu‐Hwa Chen & Chuan‐Yu Chou & Jui‐Chen Huang & Ya‐Fen Tang & Yur‐Ren Kuo & Li‐Yu Chien, 2014. "Antibacterial effects on dry‐fast and traditional water‐based surgical scrubbing methods: A two‐time points experimental study," Nursing & Health Sciences, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(2), pages 179-185, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:nuhsci:v:16:y:2014:i:2:p:179-185
    DOI: 10.1111/nhs.12082
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/nhs.12082
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/nhs.12082?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:nuhsci:v:16:y:2014:i:2:p:179-185. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1442-2018 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.