Journals / Türk Mikrobiyoloji Cemiyeti Dergisi / 2007 / Cilt: 37 - Sayı: 3

Bazı el antiseptiklerinin metisiline-dirençli Staphylococcus aureus'a karşı etkilerinin karşılaştırılması

Comparison of efficacy of some hand antiseptics against meticilline-resistant Staphylococcus aureus

Pages
161–163
Publication Date
2022-11-05
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Antiseptics which contain benzalconium chloride 10 %, 2 - propanol 70 %, chlorohexidine gluconate 4 % were found effective at in-use concentrations and a contact time of 5 min., however the antiseptic which contains mixture of ethanole 40 % + isopropanole 30 % + chlorohexidine gluconate 0.1 % was not found effective.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The effectiveness of four different hand antiseptics (chlorohexidine gluconate 4 %, benzalconium chloride 10 %, 2 – propanol 70 % and mixture of ethanole 40 % + isopropanol 30 % + chlorohexidine gluconate 0.1 %) were assesed by the quantitative suspension test against meticilline-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (S.aureus ATCC 43300).
📊
Key Findings & Data:The effectiveness of four different hand antiseptics (chlorohexidine gluconate 4 %, benzalconium chloride 10 %, 2 – propanol 70 % and mixture of ethanole 40 % + isopropanol 30 % + chlorohexidine gluconate 0.1 %) were assesed by the quantitative suspension test against meticilline-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (S.aureus ATCC 43300).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Antiseptics which contain benzalconium chloride 10 %, 2 - propanol 70 %, chlorohexidine gluconate 4 % were found effective at in-use concentrations and a contact time of 5 min., however the antiseptic which contains mixture of ethanole 40 % + isopropanole 30 % + chlorohexidine gluconate 0.1 % was not found effective.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The effectiveness of four different hand antiseptics (chlorohexidine gluconate 4 %, benzalconium chloride 10 %, 2 – propanol 70 % and mixture of ethanole 40 % + isopropanol 30 % + chlorohexidine gluconate 0.1 %) were assesed by the quantitative suspension test against meticilline-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (S.aureus ATCC 43300). Antiseptics which contain benzalconium chloride 10 %, 2 - propanol 70 %, chlorohexidine gluconate 4 % were found effective at in-use concentrations and a contact time of 5 min., however the antiseptic which contains mixture of ethanole 40 % + isopropanole 30 % + chlorohexidine gluconate 0.1 % was not found effective.

Özet

Dört farklı el antiseptiğinin (% 10'luk benzalkonyum klorür, % 70'lik 2 - propanol, % 4'lük klorheksidin glukonat ve % 40'lık etanol + % 30'luk isopropanol + % 0.1'lik klorheksidin glukonat karışımının), metisiline-dirençli Staphylococcus aureus (S.aureus ATCC 43300)'a karşı etkileri, kantitatif süspansiyon testi kullanılarak değerlendirilmiştir. % 10'luk benzalkonyum klorür, % 70'lik 2 - propanol ve % 4'lük klorheksidin glukonat içeren antiseptikler, kullanılması önerilen konsantrasyonlarda ve 5 dakikalık temas süresinde etkili bulunmuştur. Bununla birlikte % 40'lık etanol + % 30'luk isopropanol + % 0.1'lik klorheksidin glukonat karışımı içeren antiseptik aynı etkiyi göstermemiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ERYILMAZ, M., AKIN, A. (2022). Bazı el antiseptiklerinin metisiline-dirençli Staphylococcus aureus'a karşı etkilerinin karşılaştırılması. Türk Mikrobiyoloji Cemiyeti Dergisi, Cilt: 37 - Sayı: 3, 161–163. https://ajindex.com/articles/635984

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (6)

  1. Payne DN, Babb JR, Bradley, CR. An evaluation of the suitability of the European suspension test to reflect in vitro activity of antiseptics against clinically significant organisms. Lett Appl Microbiol 1999; 28:7-12
  2. Kanerva M, Blom M, Tuominen U, Kolho E, Anttila VJ, Vaara M, Virolainen-Julkunen A, Lyytikäinen O. Costs of an outbreak of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. J Hosp Infect 2007; 66:22-28
  3. Griffiths PA, Babb JR, Bradley CR, Fraise AP. Glutaraldehyde- resistant Mycobacterium chelonae from endoscope washer disinfectors. J Appl Microbiol 1997; 82:519-526
  4. Ekizoglu MT, Özalp M, Sultan N, Gür D. An investigation of the bactericidal effect of certain antiseptics and disinfectants on some hospital isolates of gram-negative bacteria. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2003; 24:225-227
  5. CDC. Community-Associated MRSA Information for the Public. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Atlanta, U.S.A, 2005
  6. Kampf G, Kramer A. Epidemiologic background of hand hygiene and evaluation of the most important agents for scrubs and rubs. Clin Microbiol Rev 17:863-893.