Comparison of hand hygiene antimicrobial efficacy:
                  <i>Melaleuca alternifolia</i> essential oil <i>versus</i>
               triclosan

Gnatta, Juliana Rizzo; Pinto, Flávia Morais Gomes; Bruna, Camila Quartim de Moraes; Souza, Rafael Queiroz de; Graziano, Kazuko Uchikawa; Silva, Maria Julia Paes da

doi:10.1590/0104-1169.2957.2356

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Revista Latino-Americana de Enfermagem

Español English

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Original Articles • Rev. Latino-Am. Enfermagem 21 (06) • Nov-Dec 2013 • https://doi.org/10.1590/0104-1169.2957.2356 copy

Comparison of hand hygiene antimicrobial efficacy: Melaleuca alternifolia essential oil versus triclosan¹ 1 Supported by Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP), process # 2011/18448-2

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

OBJECTIVE:

this study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of hand hygiene performed with two different soap formulations: 0.3% Melaleuca alternifolia essential oil versus 0.5% triclosan, and to compare them with two reference hygiene procedures: the official methodology procedure (soft soap) versus the draft version of the procedure (soft soap + propan-2-ol).

METHOD:

using the European EN 1499 method, logarithmic reduction factors were determined for the number of colony forming units of Escherichia coli K12 before and after hand hygiene of 15 volunteer subjects, and compared using the one-tailed Wilcoxon test.

RESULTS:

referring to the soft soap, there was no difference between the performance of soap with 0.3% M. alternifolia and soap containing 0.5% triclosan. The soft soap + propan-2-ol proved to be more effective than the other hand hygiene procedures.

CONCLUSION:

studies to verify the therapeutic efficacy of essential oil in hand hygiene can improve adherence to this practice.

Hand Desinfection; Tea Tree Oil; Triclosan; Infection Control; Nursing

Factor	Degrees of freedom	p-value
Treatment	3	<0.001
Group	3	0.31
Column	3	0.81

Treatment	Moment
	Pre-value				Post-value
	Dilution			Mean CFUs	Dilution			Mean CFUs
	10^-3	10^-4	10^-5	Mean CFUs	10⁰	10^-1	10^-2	Mean CFUs
Soft Soap	0.981	0.986	0.999	5.63	0.535	0.697	0.598	1.76
Soap with 0.3% TTO	0.774	0.817	0.892	5.98	0.565	0.356	0.792	2.10
Soap with 0.5% triclosan	0.763	0.986	0.934	6.38	0.343	0.805	0.750	2.79
Soft soap + propan-2-ol	0.830	0.917	0.916	6.29	0.359	0.386	0.445	1.40

Group	Subject	Soft Soap			TTO			Triclosan			Soft soap + propan-2-ol
Group	Subject	Pre	Post	RF	Pre	Post	RF	Pre	Post	RF	Pre	Post	RF
I	1	6.31	2.02	4.29	5.88	3.37	2.52	6.26	1.10	5.16	5.48	1.07	4.41
	2	4.56	1.13	3.43	5.36	1.00	4.36	7.29	3.65	3.63	7.18	1.35	5.83
	3	5.02	1.18	3.84	5.25	1.02	4.23	6.00	1.79	4.21	5.44	1.00	4.44
	4	6.25	1.06	5.19	5.68	1.12	4.56	6.11	2.23	3.88	7.42	1.00	6.42
II	5	4.76	1.22	3.54	5.24	1.90	3.34	5.41	2.47	2.94	5.97	1.22	4.76
	6	7.52	4.52	3.00	7.52	4.22	3.30	7.52	4.41	3.10	7.52	2.85	4.67
	7	7.44	3.86	3.57	5.85	1.41	4.44	6.16	1.90	4.26	6.02	1.00	5.02
	8	7.52	3.38	4.14	5.95	1.94	4.01	5.06	1.75	3.31	7.52	1.90	5.61
III	9	5.37	1.13	4.23	6.08	2.36	3.71	7.52	4.44	3.08	4.76	1.06	3.70
	10	7.52	1.06	6.46	7.16	2.78	4.39	7.52	4.23	3.29	6.55	1.00	5.55
	11	6.32	1.00	5.32	3.60	1.04	2.56	5.38	1.35	4.03	4.54	1.00	3.54
	12	3.30	1.18	2.12	6.49	2.18	4.31	7.17	3.56	3.61	6.74	2.00	4.74
IV	13	4.21	1.57	2.65	5.42	1.00	4.42	5.29	1.88	3.41	4.44	1.02	3.42
	14	4.51	1.04	3.47	7.05	3.43	3.61	5.53	3.45	2.08	7.52	2.41	5.10
	15	3.78	1.00	2.78	7.22	2.67	4.55	7.52	3.63	3.89	7.19	1.06	6.13
Mean		5.63	1.76	3.87	5.98	2.10	3.89	6.38	2.79	3.59	6.29	1.40	4.89

Product	Mean log		Reduction Factors	Wilcoxon
Product	Pre-value	Post-value	Reduction Factors	p-value
Soft Soap	5.63 (1.46)	1.76 (1.17)	3.87 (1.13)	0.0065
0.3% TTO	5.98 (1.01)	2.10 (1.03)	3.89 (0.69)	0.0010
0.5% Triclosan	6.38 (0.95)	2.79 (1.16)	3.59 (0.71)	0.0001
Soft soap + propan-2-ol	6.29 (1.14)	1.40 (0.60)	4.89 (0.91)	-

Product	Mean log		Reduction Factors	Wilcoxon
Product	Pre-value	Post-value	Reduction Factors	p-value
Soft soap + propan-2-ol	6.29 (1.14)	1.40 (0.60)	4.89 (0.91)	0.0065
0.3% TTO	5.98 (1.01)	2.10 (1.03)	3.89 (0.69)	0.2470
0.5% Triclosan	6.38 (0.95)	2.79 (1.16)	3.59 (0.71)	0.2975
Soft Soap	5.63 (1.46)	1.76 (1.17)	3.87 (1.13)	-

Escola de Enfermagem de Ribeirão Preto / Universidade de São Paulo Av. Bandeirantes, 3900, 14040-902 Ribeirão Preto SP Brazil, Tel.: +55 (16) 3315-3451 / 3315-4407 - Ribeirão Preto - SP - Brazil
E-mail: rlae@eerp.usp.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] Corresponding Author: Juliana Rizzo Gnatta Universidade de São Paulo. Hospital Universitário Av. Prof. Lineu Prestes, 2565 Bairro: Butantã CEP: 05508-000, São Paulo, SP, Brasil E-mail: juliana.gnatta@gmail.com

Brasil

Brasil

Comparison of hand hygiene antimicrobial efficacy: Melaleuca alternifolia essential oil versus triclosan1 1 Supported by Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP), process # 2011/18448-2

OBJECTIVE:

METHOD:

RESULTS:

CONCLUSION:

Comparison of hand hygiene antimicrobial efficacy: Melaleuca alternifolia essential oil versus triclosan¹ 1 Supported by Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP), process # 2011/18448-2