The danger of the toxicity and inefficacy of alcohol-based hand rubs in Iran during COVID-19: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: The use of disinfectants and alcohol-based hand rubs (ABHR) to prevent COVID-19 transmission increased in the first wave of the infection. To meet the increased demand, the Iranian Ministry of Health issued an emergency use authorization allowing new manufacturers to enter the market, despite the limited capacity for surveillance of these products during COVID-19. Methanol poisoning outbreaks spread rapidly, and more people died from methanol poisoning than COVID-19 in some cities. The aim of this study was to analyze some ABHRs in the Iranian market to see if (a) ABHRs are standard and suitable for hand antisepsis and (b) contained potentially dangerous toxic alcohols. METHOD: Between February and March 2020, 64 brands of ABHR were conveniently collected from pharmacies, supermarkets, and shops selling hygienic products and analyzed using Gas Chromatography. World Health Organization and Food and Drug Administration guidelines were used to define minimum requirements for ABHR. For estimating the risk for acute methanol poisoning, we assumed a serum methanol concentration of 200 mg/L following ABHR ingestion was sufficient to cause intoxication. This threshold concentration would be achieved in an average 75-kg adult after consuming 8000 mg (or eight grams) methanol in 1-2 h. RESULTS: The median [IQR] (range) concentration of ethanol, isopropanol, and methanol were 59% v/v [32.2, 68] (0, 99), 0 mg/L [0, 0] (0, 197,961), and 0 mg/L [0, 0] (0, 680,100), respectively. There was a strong negative correlation between methanol and ethanol contents of hand rubbers (r= -0.617, p < 0.001). Almost 47% of ABHRs complied with minimum standards. In 12.5% of ABHRs, high concentrations of methanol were observed, which have no antiseptic properties but could cause acute methanol poisoning if ingested. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 initiated a policy for distribution and use of ABHR with little control. As ABHR and masks are still accepted preventive measures of the disease, non-standard ABHR compositions may increase the population's risk to both COVID-19 infection and methanol poisoning.

[Knowledge of COVID-19 and hand washing]. / Conocimientos sobre la COVID-19 y el lavado de manos.

BACKGROUND: The best way to prevent counting the COVID-19 is hand washing. However, there is little dissemination about the importance that it has and unfortunately it has not been given the importance it deserves. OBJECTIVE: To determine the knowledge and practices that the relatives of the 5 semester nursing students have about COVID-19 and hand washing. METHOD: Descriptive research, with an intentional sampling of 83 people to respond to a pretest and posts with a preventive and informative training as a mediating tool for the use of presaberes, was carried out between March and May 2020. RESULTS: The informants had basic and adequate prior knowledge of what is involved in the practice of hand washing. A reflective interpretation was made with the design of an info graphic that visualized the state of opinion from a comparison between the instruments. The results and discussion suggested that the practice of hand washing is more than just a simple act. CONCLUSIONS: There was prior knowledge that was strengthened by training and it was interpreted that health is a heritage that must be safeguarded with responsibility and biosecurity.

BACKGROUND: La mejor forma de prevenir el COVID-19 es el lavado de manos. Sin embargo, existe poca difusión sobre la importancia que tiene y desafortunadamente no se le ha dado la importancia que merece. OBJETIVO: Determinar conocimientos y prácticas que tienen los familiares de los estudiantes de 5 semestres de enfermería Universidad del Quindío Armenia Colombia, sobre el COVID-19 y el lavado de manos. MÉTODO: Investigación descriptiva, con un muestreo intencional de 83 personas para responder a un pretest y postes con una capacitación preventiva e informativa como herramienta mediadora del aprovechamiento de los presaberes, se realizó entre marzo y mayo de 2020. RESULTADOS: Los informantes tenían un saber previo básico y adecuado acerca de lo que implica la práctica del lavado de manos. Se realizó una interpretación reflexiva con el diseño de una infografía que visibilizó el estado de opinión a partir de una comparación entre los instrumentos. Los resultados y la discusión plantearon que la práctica de lavado de manos es algo más que un acto sencillo. CONCLUSIONES: Existían conocimientos previos que fueron fortalecidos por la capacitación y se interpretó que la salud es un patrimonio que debe salvaguardarse con responsabilidad y bioseguridad.

Effects of a social norm-based handwashing intervention including handwashing stations, and a handwashing station-only intervention on handwashing with soap in urban Côte d'Ivoire: a cluster randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Diarrhoeal diseases are an important cause of mortality in children younger than 5 years in sub-Saharan Africa. We aimed to evaluate the effect of three handwashing interventions on handwashing with soap (HWWS) after toilet use. METHODS: In this cluster randomised trial in Abidjan, Côte d'Ivoire, we randomly assigned communal housing compounds (1:1:1) to receive one of three interventions: a theory of normative social behaviour (TNSB) intervention, including provision of handwashing stations; handwashing stations only; and no intervention. The TNSB intervention was designed to shift the outcome expectation associated with HWWS from health to riddance of faeces-related disgust, and to increase the perceived descriptive norm and perceived handwashing publicness. Participants and fieldworkers were masked to the study objectives. The primary outcome was HWWS after toilet use, assessed at 1 month and 5 months follow-ups. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered at the Pan African Clinical Trial Registry, PACTR201501000892239. FINDINGS: Between April 10 and May 22, 2014, we identified 92 eligible compounds, of which 75 compounds were included. Follow-up data on HWWS were available for 23 compounds for the TNSB group, 25 compounds for the handwashing station-only group, and 25 compounds for the control group. The study ended in April, 2017. Compared with a frequency of 5% (29 of 604 occasions) in the control group, HWWS after toilet use increased to 9% (49 of 557 occasions; adjusted risk ratio 1·89, 95% CI 1·16-3·08) in the handwashing station-only group, and 24% (143 of 588 occasions; 4·82, 3·06-7·59) in the TNSB group, at the 1-month follow-up. The intervention effect was only sustained in the TNSB group (98 [22%] of 450 compounds; 2·68, 1·65-4·34). INTERPRETATION: A social norm-based handwashing intervention combined with disgust-inducing messages, with provision of handwashing stations, was effective at increasing HWWS after toilet use. The provision of handwashing stations alone had little effect. Future studies should investigate whether the same approach, when delivered via mass media, can have a similar effect to the face-to-face delivery used in this study. FUNDING: None.

Effect of New Surfactants on Biological Properties of Liquid Soaps.

Liquid soaps are the basic cosmetics used to clean the skin of the hands. Frequent hand washing prevents viral contamination but may damage the skin's hydro-lipid layer, leading to various types of irritation. Therefore, four liquid soap formulas were developed with three amphoteric surfactants: Cocamidopropyl Betaine (LS II), CocamidopropylHydroxysultaine (LS III), and newly synthesized Evening PrimroseaamidopropylSulfobetaine (LS IV). We evaluated the skin irritating potential (zein number, bovine albumin test) and cytotoxicity (AlamarBlue™, Cell viability, and Cell cycle assays) on HaCaT cell line. We observed lower values of the zein number and bovine albumin tests after adding soaps with surfactants (the highest differences in LS IV) compared to the base soap (LS I). However, LS I and LS II did not differ in cytotoxic assays. Therefore, adding LS III and LS IV seems potentially more dangerous to the cells. However, it should be noted that cells were continuously exposed to liquid soaps for more than 24 h, so its cytotoxic effects after dermal use in humans may be unnoticeable. Concluding, results suggest that the newly synthesized LS IV should improve the safety of liquid hand washing soaps.

Acceptability of an alcohol-based handrub gel with superfatting agents among healthcare workers: a randomized crossover controlled study.

INTRODUCTION: Healthcare workers often experience skin dryness and irritation from performing hand hygiene frequently. Low acceptability and tolerability of a formulation are barriers to hand hygiene compliance, though little research has been conducted on what specific types of formulation have higher acceptability than others. OBJECTIVE: To compare the acceptability and tolerability of an ethanol-based handrub gel with superfatting agents to the isopropanol-based formulations (a rub and a gel formulation) currently used by healthcare workers at the University of Geneva Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland. METHODS: Forty-two participants were randomized to two sequences, testing the isopropanol-based formulation that they are using currently (Hopirub® or Hopigel®), and the ethanol-based formulation containing superfatting agents (Saniswiss Sanitizer Hands H1). Participants tested each of the formulations over 7-10 day work shifts, after which skin condition was assessed and feedback was collected. RESULTS: H1 scored significantly better than the control formulations for skin dryness (P = 0.0209), and participants felt less discomfort in their hands when using that formulation (P = 0.0448). H1 caused less skin dryness than Hopirub®/Hopigel® (P = 0.0210). Though overall preference was quite polarized, 21 participants preferred H1 intervention formulation and 17 preferred the Hopirub®/Hopigel® formulation that they normally used in their care activities. CONCLUSION: We observed a difference in acceptability and strongly polarized preferences among the participants' reactions to the formulations tested. These results indicate that giving healthcare workers a choice between different high-quality products is important to ensure maximum acceptability.

Using effective hand hygiene practice to prevent and control infection.

Decontamination using hand hygiene remains one of the most important and effective methods for reducing healthcare-associated infections and cross-infection between patients. In 1860, Florence Nightingale wrote that nurses should wash their hands frequently throughout the day, demonstrating an early awareness of the effectiveness of this simple procedure. The COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated that effectively applied hand hygiene is a vital intervention that can be used to prevent the spread of disease. This article details the correct procedure required for effective hand hygiene and emphasises the need for nurses to keep up to date with evidence-based guidelines. The article also outlines the differences between hand decontamination using alcohol-based hand gels and soap and water, and the complex factors that can interfere with effective hand hygiene compliance.

Hand hygiene with hand sanitizer versus handwashing: what are the planetary health consequences?

In order to reduce the transmission of pathogens, and COVID-19, WHO and NHS England recommend hand washing (HW) and/or the use of hand sanitizer (HS). The planetary health consequences of these different methods of hand hygiene have not been quantified. A comparative life cycle assessment (LCA) was carried out to compare the environmental impact of the UK population practising increased levels of hand hygiene during the COVID-19 pandemic for 1 year. Washing hands with soap and water was compared to using hand sanitizer (both ethanol and isopropanol based sanitizers were studied). The isopropanol-based HS had the lowest environmental impact in 14 out of the 16 impact categories used in this study. For climate change, hand hygiene using isopropanol HS produced the equivalent of 1060 million kg CO2, compared to 1460 million for ethanol HS, 2300 million for bar soap HW, and 4240 million for liquid soap HW. For both the ethanol and isopropanol HS, the active ingredient was the greatest overall contributing factor to the environmental impact (83.24% and 68.68% respectively). For HW with liquid soap and bar soap, there were additional contributing factors other than the soap itself: for example tap water use (28.12% and 48.68% respectively) and the laundering of a hand towel to dry the hands (10.17% and 17.92% respectively). All forms of hand hygiene have an environmental cost, and this needs to be weighed up against the health benefits of preventing disease transmission. When comparing hand sanitizers to handwashing with soap and water, this study found that using isopropanol based hand sanitizer is better for planetary health. However, no method of hand hygiene was ideal; isopropanol had a greater fossil fuel resource use than ethanol based hand sanitizer. More research is needed to find hand hygiene sources which do not diminish planetary health, and environmental impact is a consideration for public health campaigns around hand hygiene.

Non-pharmaceutical interventions during the COVID-19 epidemic changed detection rates of other circulating respiratory pathogens in Japan.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has circulated worldwide and causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). At the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, infection control measures were taken, such as hand washing, mask wearing, and behavioral restrictions. However, it is not fully clear how the effects of these non-pharmaceutical interventions changed the prevalence of other pathogens associated with respiratory infections. In this study, we collected 3,508 nasopharyngeal swab samples from 3,249 patients who visited the Yamanashi Central Hospital in Japan from March 1, 2020 to February 28, 2021. We performed multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) using the FilmArray Respiratory Panel and singleplex quantitative reverse transcription PCR targeting SARS-CoV-2 to detect respiratory disease-associated pathogens. At least one pathogen was detected in 246 (7.0%) of the 3,508 samples. Eleven types of pathogens were detected in the samples collected from March-May 2020, during which non-pharmaceutical interventions were not well implemented. In contrast, after non-pharmaceutical interventions were thoroughly implemented, only five types of pathogens were detected, and the majority were SARS-CoV-2, adenoviruses, or human rhinoviruses / enteroviruses. The 0-9 year age group had a higher prevalence of infection with adenoviruses and human rhinoviruses / enteroviruses compared with those 10 years and older, while those 10 years and older had a higher prevalence of infection with SARS-CoV-2 and other pathogens. These results indicated that non-pharmaceutical interventions likely reduced the diversity of circulating pathogens. Moreover, differences in the prevalence of pathogens were observed among the different age groups.

Assessment of hand hygiene strategies on skin barrier function during COVID-19 pandemic: A randomized clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has increased the frequency of handwashing. There is scarce evidence regarding the impact of different hand hygiene procedures on skin barrier function in clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: To compare the impact on skin barrier function of different hand hygiene measures in healthcare workers in daily practice. METHODS: A randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted. Participants were randomized to sanitize their hands with water and soap, alcohol-based hand sanitizers (ABHSs), or disinfectant wipes during their 8-hour working shift. Epidermal barrier functional parameters, such as transepidermal water loss (TEWL), and the microbial load were assessed before and immediately after the working day. Tolerance and acceptability of each product were recorded after work. RESULTS: Sixty-two participants were included and 20, 21, and 21 were randomized to use water and soap, ABHS, and disinfectant wipes, respectively. After the 8-hour shift, TEWL increase was higher with disinfectant wipes than with soaps or ABHS (+5.45 vs +3.87 vs -1.46 g h-1  m-2 , respectively; P = .023). Bacteria and fungi colony-forming unit (CFU) count reductions were lower for the water and soap group than for ABHS and disinfectant wipes. Disinfectant wipes were considered more difficult to use (P = .013) compared with water and soap and ABHS. CONCLUSION: Daily hand hygiene with ABHS showed the lowest rates of skin barrier disruption and the highest reduction of CFU.

Effectiveness of public health measures in reducing the incidence of covid-19, SARS-CoV-2 transmission, and covid-19 mortality: systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To review the evidence on the effectiveness of public health measures in reducing the incidence of covid-19, SARS-CoV-2 transmission, and covid-19 mortality. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Biosis, Joanna Briggs, Global Health, and World Health Organization COVID-19 database (preprints). ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION: Observational and interventional studies that assessed the effectiveness of public health measures in reducing the incidence of covid-19, SARS-CoV-2 transmission, and covid-19 mortality. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measure was incidence of covid-19. Secondary outcomes included SARS-CoV-2 transmission and covid-19 mortality. DATA SYNTHESIS: DerSimonian Laird random effects meta-analysis was performed to investigate the effect of mask wearing, handwashing, and physical distancing measures on incidence of covid-19. Pooled effect estimates with corresponding 95% confidence intervals were computed, and heterogeneity among studies was assessed using Cochran's Q test and the I2 metrics, with two tailed P values. RESULTS: 72 studies met the inclusion criteria, of which 35 evaluated individual public health measures and 37 assessed multiple public health measures as a "package of interventions." Eight of 35 studies were included in the meta-analysis, which indicated a reduction in incidence of covid-19 associated with handwashing (relative risk 0.47, 95% confidence interval 0.19 to 1.12, I2=12%), mask wearing (0.47, 0.29 to 0.75, I2=84%), and physical distancing (0.75, 0.59 to 0.95, I2=87%). Owing to heterogeneity of the studies, meta-analysis was not possible for the outcomes of quarantine and isolation, universal lockdowns, and closures of borders, schools, and workplaces. The effects of these interventions were synthesised descriptively. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that several personal protective and social measures, including handwashing, mask wearing, and physical distancing are associated with reductions in the incidence covid-19. Public health efforts to implement public health measures should consider community health and sociocultural needs, and future research is needed to better understand the effectiveness of public health measures in the context of covid-19 vaccination. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020178692.

Utilizing the SEIPS model to guide hand hygiene interventions at a tertiary hospital in Ethiopia.

We aimed to apply the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) model to increase effectiveness and sustainability of the World Health Organization's (WHOs) hand hygiene (HH) guidelines within healthcare systems. Our cross-sectional, mixed-methods study took place at Jimma University Medical Center (JUMC), a tertiary care hospital in Jimma, Ethiopia, between November 2018 and August 2020 and consisted of three phases: baseline assessment, intervention, and follow-up assessment. We conducted questionnaires addressing HH knowledge and attitudes, interviews to identify HH barriers and facilitators within the SEIPS framework, and observations at the WHO's 5 moments of HH amongst healthcare workers (HCWs) at JUMC. We then implemented HH interventions based on WHO guidelines and results from our baseline assessment. Follow-up HH observations were conducted months later during the Covid-19 pandemic. 250 HCWs completed questionnaires with an average knowledge score of 61.4% and attitude scores indicating agreement that HH promotes patient safety. Interview participants cited multiple barriers to HH including shortages and location of HH materials, inadequate training, minimal Infection Prevention Control team presence, and high workload. We found an overall baseline HH compliance rate of 9.4% and a follow-up compliance rate of 72.1%. Drastically higher follow-up compared to baseline compliance rates were likely impacted by our HH interventions and Covid-19. HCWs showed motivation for patient safety despite low HH knowledge. Utilizing the SEIPS model helped identify institution-specific barriers that informed targeted interventions beyond WHO guidelines aimed at increasing effectiveness and sustainability of HH efforts.

Social distancing and preventive practices of government employees in response to COVID-19 in Ethiopia.

Public health and social interventions are critical to mitigate the spread of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Ethiopia has implemented a variety of public health and social measures to control the pandemic. This study aimed to assess social distancing and public health preventive practices of government employees in response to COVID-19. A cross-sectional study was conducted among 1,573 government employees selected from 46 public institutions located in Addis Ababa. Data were collected from 8th to 19th June 2020 using a paper-based self-administered questionnaire and analyzed using SPSS version 23.0. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data. Binary logistic regression analyses were used to identify factors associated with outcome variables (perceived effectiveness of facemask wearing to prevent coronavirus infection, and COVID-19 testing). Majority of the participants reported facemask wearing (96%), avoiding close contact with people including handshaking (94.8%), consistently followed government recommendations (95.6%), frequent handwashing (94.5%), practiced physical distancing (89.5%), avoided mass gatherings and crowded places (88.1%), restricting movement and travelling (71.8%), and stayed home (35.6%). More than 80% of the participants perceived that consistently wearing a facemask is highly effective in preventing coronavirus infection. Respondents from Oromia perceived less about the effectiveness of wearing facemask in preventing coronavirus infection (adjusted OR = 0.27, 95% CI:0.17-0.45). About 19% of the respondents reported that they had ever tested for COVID-19. Respondents between 40-49 years old (adjusted OR = 0.41, 95% CI:0.22-0.76) and 50-66 years (adjusted OR = 0.43, 95% CI:0.19-0.95) were less likely tested for coronavirus than the younger age groups. Similarly, respondents from Oromia were less likely to test for coronavirus (adjusted OR = 0.26, 95% CI:0.12-0.56) than those from national level. Participants who were sure about the availability of COVID-19 testing were more likely to test for coronavirus. About 57% of the respondents perceived that the policy measures in response to the pandemic were inadequate. The findings showed higher social distancing and preventive practices among the government employees in response to COVID-19. Rules and regulations imposed by the government should be enforced and people should properly apply wearing facemasks, frequent handwashing, social and physical distancing measures as a comprehensive package of COVID-19 prevention and control strategies.

Global adoption of personal and social mitigation behaviors during COVID-19: The role of trust & confidence.

What influences the adoption of SARS-CoV-2 mitigation behaviors-both personal, such as mask wearing and frequent handwashing, and social, such as avoiding large gatherings and physical contact-across countries? Understanding why some individuals are more willing to change their behavior to mitigate the spread of a pandemic will not only help us to address the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic but also to respond to future ones. Researchers have pointed to a variety of factors that may influence individual adoption of personal and social mitigation behaviors, including social inequality, risk perception, personality traits, and government policies. While not denying the importance of these factors, we argue that the role of trust and confidence has received insufficient attention to date. Our study explores whether there is a difference in the way trust and confidence in particular leaders and organizations affect individual compliance and whether this effect is consistent across different types of mitigation behaviors. Specifically, we utilize an original cross-national survey conducted during the first wave of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic (May-June 2020) to investigate how trust in scientists, medical professionals, politicians, and religious leaders and confidence in global, national, and local health organizations affects individual compliance in 16 countries/territories across five world regions. Our analyses, which control for the aforementioned factors as well as several others, suggest that trust in politicians and confidence in national health ministries have the most consistent influence on whether individuals adopt both personal and social mitigation behaviors. Across our sample, we find that greater trust in politicians is associated with lower levels of individual compliance with public health directives, whereas greater confidence in the national health ministry is associated with higher levels of individual compliance. Our findings suggest the need to understand trust and confidence as among the most important individual level characteristics driving compliance when developing and delivering messaging about the adoption of mitigation behaviors. The content of the message, it seems, will be most effective when citizens across countries trust its source. Trusted sources, such as politicians and the national health ministry, should thus consider working closely together when determining and communicating recommended health behaviors to avoid contradicting one another.

Potential sources, modes of transmission and effectiveness of prevention measures against SARS-CoV-2.

During the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic new studies are emerging daily providing novel information about sources, transmission risks and possible prevention measures. In this review, we aimed to comprehensively summarize the current evidence on possible sources for SARS-CoV-2, including evaluation of transmission risks and effectiveness of applied prevention measures. Next to symptomatic patients, asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic carriers are a possible source with respiratory secretions as the most likely cause for viral transmission. Air and inanimate surfaces may be sources; however, viral RNA has been inconsistently detected. Similarly, even though SARS-CoV-2 RNA has been detected on or in personal protective equipment (PPE), blood, urine, eyes, the gastrointestinal tract and pets, these sources are currently thought to play a negligible role for transmission. Finally, various prevention measures such as handwashing, hand disinfection, face masks, gloves, surface disinfection or physical distancing for the healthcare setting and in public are analysed for their expected protective effect.

Hand hygiene in health care: 20 years of ongoing advances and perspectives.

Health-care-associated infections are the most prevalent adverse events of hospital care, posing a substantial threat to patient safety and burden on society. Hand hygiene with alcohol-based hand rub is the most effective preventive strategy to reduce health-care-associated infections. Over the past two decades, various interventions have been introduced and studied to improve hand hygiene compliance among health-care workers. The global implementation of the WHO multimodal hand hygiene improvement strategy and constant efforts to replace the use of soap and water with alcohol-based hand rub have led to a faster and more efficient hand cleaning method. These strategies have strongly contributed to the success of behaviour change and a subsequent decrease in health-care-associated infections and cross-transmission of multidrug-resistant organisms worldwide. The WHO multimodal behaviour change strategy requires a series of elements including system change as a prerequisite for behaviour, change, education, monitoring and performance feedback, reminders in the workplace, and an institutional safety climate. Successful adoption of the promotion strategy requires adaptation to available resources and sociocultural contexts. This Review focuses on the major advances and challenges in hand hygiene research and practices in the past 20 years and sets out various ways forward for improving this lifesaving action.

Increased Adherence to Infection Control Practices Among Medical Laboratory Technicians During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Self-Reported Survey Study.

Background: The adherence of medical laboratory technicians (MLT) to infection control guidelines is essential for reducing the risk of exposure to infectious agents. This study explored the adherence of MLT towards infection control practices during the COVID-19 pandemic. Method: The study population consisted of MLT (n = 444) who worked in private and government health sectors in Jordan. A self-reported survey was used to collect data from participants. Findings: More than 87% of the participants reported adherence to hand-washing guidelines and using personal protective equipment (PPE) when interacting with patients (74.5%), and handling clinical samples (70.0%). Besides, 88.1%, 48.2%, and 7.7% reported wearing of lab coats, face masks, and goggles, at all times, respectively. The majority reported increased adherence to infection control practices during the COVID-19 pandemic. This includes increased PPE use at the workplace (94.2%), increased frequency of disinfection of laboratory surfaces (92.4%) and laboratory equipment (86.7%), and increased frequency of handwashing/use of antiseptics (94.6%). Having a graduate degree was significantly associated with increased adherence of participants to the daily use of goggles/eye protection (p = 0.002), and the use of PPE while handling clinical samples (p = 0.011). Having work experience of >10 years was associated with increased adherence to the use of PPE while handling clinical samples (p = 0.001). Conclusion: MLT reported very good adherence with most assessed infection control practices. In addition, they reported increased conformity with infection control guidelines during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Raising awareness about the unintended consequences of hand sanitiser in children.

The use of hand sanitisers is common practice to prevent the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the safety thereof requires consideration as this may be hazardous in children. Recent studies have shown that the misuse and increased unsupervised availability of alcohol-based hand sanitisers may result in adverse events in children such as skin irritation, dryness, cracking and peeling. Unintentional or intentional ingestion of hand sanitisers in children under the age of 12 years may occur because of the colour, smell and flavour added to it. Consumption of alcohol in children may result in hypoglycaemia, apnoea and acidosis. This allows the invasion of other bacterial and viral infections. Children may also rub their eyes with sanitised hands and cause ocular injury. Therefore, the use of hand sanitisers in general needs to be revised in both children and adults. Other interventions on lowering the risk of adverse events because of misuse of hand sanitiser should be practised more often. These include promoting washing of hands over sanitisers where possible, training children on how to use hand sanitisers and creating awareness of the dangers if ingested or in contact with the eyes.

Systemic absorption of benzalkonium chloride after maximal use of a consumer antiseptic wash product.

An in vivo pharmacokinetic study was conducted using consumer antiseptic wash containing 0.13% benzalkonium chloride (BAC) to assess the effect of dermal absorption on long-term systemic exposure to BAC. The objective of the study was to determine blood levels of BAC under maximal use conditions. Subjects were enlisted to wash their hands 60 s with soap containing 0.13% BAC 30 times per day over an 8-9 h time period for 5 consecutive days. The test product with the highest absorption potential was selected based on market share and results from in vitro permeation testing. Blood plasma was collected from subjects on 32 occasions over the 6-day study period. Plasma samples were analyzed for the C12 and C14 homologs of BAC using LC-MS/MS with a lower limit of quantitation (LLOQ) of 106.9 and 32.6 ng/L, respectively. For the 32 subjects, C12 homolog was detected above the LLOQ in only four of 1,024 plasma samples at 117.8-191.7 ng/L, and C14 homolog was detected in only one sample at 59.5 ng/L. Consequently, systemic exposure to BAC in antimicrobial soap is very low and below the level of concern identified by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (500 ng/L) even under maximal use conditions.