ABSTRACT
Irritant contact dermatitis (ICD) affects over 20% of health care workers, who manage their condition by substituting soap with an emollient cleanser. It is not clear whether emollient cleansers have the same level of virus eliminating activity as soap. Therefore, we evaluated a range of emollient cleansers for virus eliminating activity against enveloped (coronavirus and herpes simplex virus) and nonenveloped viruses (adenovirus (Ad)). In accordance with European standards a range of cleansers were combined with viruses under different (‘clean’ and ‘dirty’ hand hygiene) conditions. Virus viability and architecture were determined by plaque /TCDI50 assays and transmission electron microscopy. Traditional soaps (natural fatty acid), synthetic soaps and emollient cleansers (e.g., ceramide-containing cleansers) exhibited significant antiviral activity in enveloped viruses. However, the antiviral activity of traditional soaps reduced drastically when combined with hard water. Moreover, nonenveloped viruses were less susceptible to both synthetic soaps and emollients cleansers. Interestingly, traditional soaps inhibited the viability of Ad at high concentrations, but only in soft water. Most emollient cleansers were effective at eliminating enveloped viruses, suggesting that they are an acceptable substitute for soap to control the spread of viruses, like SARS-CoV-2, and protect against ICD. Nonenveloped viruses showed resistance to most of the hand hygiene products tested, except for traditional soap. This suggests that hand washing alone may not be sufficient to control the spread of nonenveloped viruses. Taken together this suggests that different virus strains respond differently to soaps and cleansers, and that this should be considered in the guidance for hand hygiene.