论文部分内容阅读
目的比较快速手消毒液与洗手液洗手的消毒效果,探讨适合的手卫生方法。方法选取本院100例医护人员,随机将其分为快速手消毒液组和洗手液组等两组,每组各50例。观察两组洗手前后的细菌总数。结果快速手消毒液组和洗手液组对手带菌量≥50cfu/cm2的洗手后细菌群落数均较洗手前减少,差异有统计学意义(t=54.97,P<0.01;t=52.78,P<0.01);洗手后两组细菌群落数比较,差异有统计学意义(t=9.33,P<0.01);两组合格率比较,差异有统计学意义(χ2=8.90,P<0.01)。快速手消毒液组和洗手液组对手带菌量<50 cfu/cm2的洗手后细菌群落数均较洗手前减少,差异有统计学意义(t=38.98,P<0.01;t=36.53,P<0.01);洗手后两组细菌群落数比较,差异无统计学意义(t=0.33,P>0.05);两组合格率比较,差异无统计学意义(χ2=0.10,P>0.05)。结论两种手卫生方法均消毒效果显著,但手部污染明显(带菌量≥50cfu/cm2)时,用快速手消毒液处理的合格率低于洗手液,此时应选用洗手液加流动水洗手。
Objective To compare the disinfection effects of rapid hand sanitizer and hand sanitizer and discuss the suitable hand sanitation methods. Methods A total of 100 medical staff in our hospital were randomly divided into two groups: fast hand disinfectant group and hand lotion group, with 50 cases in each group. The total number of bacteria in both groups before and after washing hands was observed. Results The number of bacterial colonies after hand washing in fast hand disinfectant group and hand lotion group was significantly lower than those before hand washing (t = 54.97, P <0.01; t = 52.78, P <0.01) (T = 9.33, P <0.01). There was significant difference between the two groups in the rate of bacterial colonization (χ2 = 8.90, P <0.01). The number of bacterial communities after hand washing in fast hand disinfectant group and hand lotion group was significantly lower than that before hand washing (t = 38.98, P <0.01; t = 36.53, P <0.01) ). After washing hands, there was no significant difference in the number of bacterial communities between the two groups (t = 0.33, P> 0.05). There was no significant difference in the passing rate between two groups (χ2 = 0.10, P> 0.05). Conclusion Both hand hygiene methods have significant disinfection effect. However, when the hand contamination is obvious (the amount of bacteria is more than 50 cfu / cm2), the pass rate of disinfecting with rapid hand disinfectant is lower than that of hand sanitizer. .