Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Twenty surgical staff members participated in a clinical trial to compare the microbiology and skin condition of hands when using a traditional surgical scrub (TSS) with a detergent-based antiseptic containing 4% chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) and a short application without scrub of a waterless hand preparation (HP) containing 61% ethyl alcohol, 1% CHG, and emollients. The HP was associated with less skin damage (P = .002) and lower microbial counts postscrub at days five (P = .002) and 19 (P = .02). The HP protocol had shorter contact time (HP mean [M] = 80.7 seconds; TSS M = 144.9 seconds; P < .0001), and more subjects preferred the HP regimen (P = .001). The HP performed better than the TSS, was less costly, and should be evaluated in larger trials and considered for widespread implementation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Larson et al. (2001) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: