Determination of ethanol, isopropyl alcohol and methanol in alcohol-based hand sanitiser to ensure product quality, safety and efficacy.

The Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) outbreak is an unprecedented global pandemic, sparking grave public health emergencies. One of the measures to reduce COVID-19 transmissions recommended by the World Health Organization is hand hygiene, i.e., washing hands with soap and water or disinfecting them using an alcohol-based hand sanitiser (ABHS). Unfortunately, competing ABHSs with unknown quality, safety, and efficacy thrived, posing yet another risk to consumers. This study aims to develop, optimise, and validate a gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS)-based analytical method to simultaneously identify and quantify ethanol or isopropyl alcohol as the active ingredient in ABHS, with simultaneous determination of methanol as an impurity. The GC-MS was operated in Electron Ionisation mode, and Selected Ion Monitoring was chosen as the data acquisition method for quantitation. The analytical method was validated for liquid and gel ABHSs, covering the specificity, linearity and range, accuracy, and precisions, including the limit of detection and the limit of quantitation. The specificity of each target analyte was established using the optimised chromatographic separation with unique quantifier and qualifier ions. The linearity was ascertained with a coefficient of determination (r2) of > 0.9994 over the corresponding specification range. Respectively, the accuracy and precisions were satisfactory within 98.99 to 101.09% and < 3.04% of the relative standard deviation. The method was successfully applied to 69 ABHS samples, where 14 contained insufficient amounts of the active ingredient. Alarmingly, four samples comprised a high amount of methanol ranging from 5.3 to 19.4% with respect to the active alcohol percentage, which may pose significant short- and long-term health issues, leading to life-threatening crises for consumers. The method established would benefit in protecting the public against the potential harm due to substandard or unsafe ABHS products, primarily due to the presence of hazardous impurities such as methanol.

Comparing the antibacterial efficacy and functionality of different commercial alcohol-based sanitizers.

The use of alcohol-based sanitizers has been recommended as an effective alternative to clean hands, especially in the case when hand washing is not doable. This is especially critical with the COVID-19 pandemic, where personal hygiene is an important factor to deter the spread of the virus. This study assesses and evaluates the differences in antibacterial efficacy and functionalities of five different commercial alcohol-based sanitizers with different formulations. All sanitizers were able to provide instant sanitization functionality, effectively killing 5x105 CFU/mL of inoculated bacteria. However, comparing pure alcohol-based sanitizers against alcohol-based sanitizers with a secondary active ingredient demonstrated that the addition of a secondary active ingredient enhanced the effectiveness and functionalities of the sanitizers. Alcohol-based sanitizers with secondary active ingredients demonstrated a more rapid antimicrobial mode of action, eradicating all 106 CFU/mL of bacteria within 15 seconds of contact, in contrast to the 30 min for purely alcohol-based sanitizers. The secondary active ingredient also provided additional anti-biofilm functionality to prevent opportunistic microbes from attaching and proliferating on the treated surface, leading to serious biofilm formation. On top of that, treatment of surfaces with alcohol-based sanitizers with secondary active ingredients also imparted prolonged antimicrobial protection to the surface lasting up to 24 h. On the other hand, purely alcohol-based sanitizers do not seem to possess such quality with the treated surface being vulnerable to microbial contamination within minutes after application. These results highlighted the benefits of adding a secondary active ingredient in sanitizer formulation. However, care needs to be taken to evaluate the type and concentration of antimicrobial agents chosen as the secondary active ingredient.

Impact on touch DNA of an alcohol-based hand sanitizer used in COVID-19 prevention.

In the last years, forensic research has been focused on touch DNA in order to improve its evidential value in criminal activity investigations as well as to understand the variables impacting touch DNA. One of the emerging variables is represented by the use of alcohol-based sanitizers, which was suggested for hand hygiene during the COVID-19 pandemic. The aims of the present study were to assess the effect of a hand sanitizer on touch DNA deposition, transfer, and recovery and also to evaluate STR typing success, quality of DNA profiles, and personal identification. Before and after the use of an alcohol-based hand sanitizer, 20 volunteers deposited on glass surfaces 120 fingerprints, containing skin-derived or salivary DNA. Samples were quantified by real-time quantitative PCR (q-PCR), and 76 samples yielding > 15 pg/µl were typed for 21 autosomal STRs by GlobalFiler® PCR Amplification Kit. DNA profiles were classified into single source, mixed, and inconclusive profiles, and a LR assessment was performed by comparison to the reference samples using LRmix Studio software. After the use of hand sanitizer, samples yielded lower quantities of recovered transferred DNA, especially considering samples containing salivary DNA (p < 0.05 by Friedman test). All the 76 amplified samples (63.3% of the total) showed at least 10 typed loci, and 83-100% of profiles were consistent with the reference ones on the basis of a LR value ≥ 106. Results showed that, although the hand sanitizer reduces the DNA recovering, touch DNA samples might still be useful for forensic personal identification even when hand sanitizers are used.

Effect of Long-Term Use of Alcohol-Containing Handwashing Gels on the Biofilm-Forming Capacity of Staphylococcus epidermidis.

The spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has promoted the use of hand sanitizers among the general population as recommended by health authorities. Alcohols, which are used in many hand sanitizers, have been shown to promotes the formation of biofilms by certain bacteria and to increase bacterial resistance to disinfection. We investigated the effect of continued use of alcohol-based gel hand sanitizer on biofilm formation by the Staphylococcus epidermidis resident strain isolated from the hands of health science students. Hand microbes were counted before and after handwashing, and the ability to produce biofilms was investigated. We found that 179 (84.8%) strains of S. epidermidis isolated from hands had the ability to form biofilm (biofilm-positive strains) in an alcohol-free culture medium. Furthermore, the presence of alcohol in the culture medium induced biofilm formation in 13 (40.6%) of the biofilm-negative strains and increased biofilm production in 111 (76.6%) strains, which were classified as low-grade biofilm-producing. Based on our findings, there is no clear evidence that the continued use of alcohol-based gels results in the selection of strains with the capacity to form biofilms. However, other disinfectant formulations that are more commonly used in clinical settings, such as alcohol-based hand-rub solutions, should be tested for their long-term effects.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic waves on health-care worker hand hygiene activity in department of medicine and ICU as measured by an automated monitoring system.

BACKGROUND: Hand hygiene (HH) compliance among health-care workers is important for preventing transmission of infectious diseases. AIM: To describe health-care worker hand hygiene activity in ICU and non-ICU patients' rooms, using an automated monitoring system (AMS), before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: At the Intercommunal Hospital of Créteil, near Paris, France, alcohol-based hand sanitizer (ABHS) consumption in the Department of Medicine (DM) and ICU was recorded using an AMS during four periods: before, during, and after the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, and during its second wave. FINDINGS: From 1st February to 30th November 2020, in the DM, the mean number of doses per patient-day for each of the four periods was, respectively, 5.7 (±0.3), 19.4 (±1.3), 17.6 (±0.7), and 7.9 (±0.2, P < 0.0001). In contrast, ICU ABHS consumption remained relatively constant. In the DM, during the pandemic waves, ABHS consumption was higher in rooms of COVID-19 patients than in other patients' rooms. Multivariate analysis showed ABHS consumption was associated with the period in the DM, and with the number of HCWs in the ICU. CONCLUSION: An AMS allows real-time collection of ABHS consumption data that can be used to adapt training and prevention measures to specific hospital departments.

Non-Alcohol Hand Sanitiser Gels with Mandelic Acid and Essential Oils.

Antimicrobial hand gels have become extremely popular in recent years due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Frequent use of hand sanitising gel can lead to dryness and irritation of the skin. This work focuses on the preparation of antimicrobial acrylic acid (Carbomer)-based gels enhanced by non-traditional compounds-mandelic acid and essential oils-as a substitute for irritating ethanol. Physicochemical properties (pH and viscosity), stability and sensory attributes of the prepared gels were investigated. Antimicrobial activity against representative Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria and yeasts was determined. The prepared gels with mandelic acid and essential oil (cinnamon, clove, lemon, and thyme) proved to have antimicrobial activity and even better organoleptic properties than commercial ethanol-based antimicrobial gel. Further, results confirmed that the addition of mandelic acid had a desirable effect on gel properties (antimicrobial, consistency, stability). It has been shown that the essential oil/mandelic acid combination can be a dermatologically beneficial hand sanitiser compared to commercial products. Thus, the produced gels can be used as a natural alternative to alcohol-based daily hand hygiene sanitisers.

Application of the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation and Behavior (COM-B) model to identify predictors of two self-reported hand hygiene behaviors (handwashing and hand sanitizer use) to prevent COVID-19 infection among U.S. adults, Fall 2020.

BACKGROUND: Handwashing with soap and water is an important way to prevent transmission of viruses and bacteria and worldwide it is estimated handwashing can prevent 1 in 5 viral respiratory infections. Frequent handwashing is associated with a decreased risk for infection with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Using a hand sanitizer with at least 60% alcohol when handwashing is not feasible can also help prevent the transmission of viruses and bacteria. OBJECTIVE: Since early 2020, the public has been encouraged to handwash frequently with soap and water and use alcohol-based hand sanitizer when soap and water are not available to reduce COVID-19 transmission. This study's objectives were to assess U.S. adults' perceptions of components of the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation and Behavior (COM-B) Model in relation to these two hand hygiene behaviors and to identify relationships between these components and hand hygiene behaviors. METHODS: Items assessing capability, opportunity, motivation, and hand hygiene behaviors were included in FallStyles, a survey completed by 3,625 adults in the fall of 2020 through an online panel representative of the U.S. POPULATION: We calculated composite capability, opportunity, and motivation measures and descriptive statistics for all measures. Finally, we conducted multiple logistic regressions to identify predictors of handwashing and hand sanitizer use. RESULTS: Most respondents reported frequently washing hands with soap and water (89%) and using alcohol-based hand sanitizer (72%) to prevent coronavirus. For capability, over 90% of respondents said that neither behavior takes a lot of effort, but fewer agreed that they knew when, or how, they should engage in handwashing (67%; 74%) and hand sanitizer use (62%; 64%). For opportunity, over 95% of respondents said lack of time didn't make it hard to engage in either behavior; fewer said visual cues reminded them to engage in the behaviors (handwashing: 30%; sanitizer use: 48%). For motivation, the majority believed the two behaviors were good ways to prevent coronavirus illness (handwashing: 76%; sanitizer use: 59%). Regressions indicated that capability, opportunity, and particularly motivation were positively associated with both hand hygiene behaviors. CONCLUSIONS: The COM-B model was a helpful framework for increasing understanding of hand hygiene behavior; it identified capability, opportunity, and motivation as predictors of both handwashing and hand sanitizer use.

Hand sanitizer-related calls at the National Poisons Information Centre, India during the lockdown period of the Covid-19 pandemic.

Background Hand sanitizer (HS) has been increasingly used during the Covid-19 pandemic. We compared the telephonic calls received by the National Poisons Information Centre (NPIC), New Delhi, India, related to its unsafe exposure and inappropriate use during the lockdown and prelockdown periods. Methods We analysed and compared telephonic call records of 3 months of pre-lockdown and 3 months of the lockdown and HS-related calls in different age groups and zones during these periods. Results The centre received 4000 calls; of these 1583 (40%) were related to household products of which only 63 (4%) were related to HS. There was an 8-fold increase in the number of calls received at the NPIC during the lockdown compared to the pre-lockdown period seeking medical attention following unsafe exposure or inappropriate use of HS. More calls were received from the south and north zones and, in the majority of these cases, HS was ingested accidentally. In some cases, HS was ingested intentionally for suicide during the lockdown. Conclusions Our study shows that unsafe exposure of HS is common under conditions of stress as seen during the lockdown period of the Covid-19 pandemic. It should be kept out of reach of small children. Further, providing psychological help and counselling to older age groups under conditions of stress are important issues of concern.

Evaluation of the Safety and Efficacy of Hand Sanitizer Products Marketed to Children Available during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Hand sanitizer use in the United States (U.S.) increased after the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released temporary manufacturer guidance, changing impurity level limits for alcohol-based hand sanitizers (ABHSs). Since the guidance took effect, the FDA has recommended against using these hand sanitizers due to concerns over safety, efficacy, and/or risk of incidental ingestion. To address current gaps in exposure characterization, this study describes a survey of ABHSs marketed to children available in the U.S., as defined by several inclusion criteria. A subset of ABHSs (n = 31) were evaluated for ethanol and organic impurities using a modified FDA method. Products with detectable impurity levels were compared to the FDA's established interim limits. Seven children's products had impurity levels exceeding the FDA's recommended interim limits, including benzene (up to 9.14 ppm), acetaldehyde (up to 134.12 ppm), and acetal (up to 75.60 ppm). The total measured alcohol content ranged from 52% to 98% in all hand sanitizers tested, ranging from 39% below, and up to 31% above, the labeled concentration. Future studies should confirm impurity contamination sources. A risk assessment could determine whether dermal application or incidental ingestion of impurity-containing hand sanitizers pose any consumer risk.

Impact of COVID-19 Awareness on Protective Behaviors during the Off-Peak Period: Sex Differences among Chinese Undergraduates.

COVID-19 remains an extreme threat in higher education settings, even during the off-peak period. Appropriate protective measures have been suggested to prevent the spread of COVID-19 in a large population context. Undergraduate students represent a highly vulnerable fraction of the population, so their COVID-19 protective behaviors play critical roles in enabling successful pandemic prevention. Hence, this study aims to understand what and how individual factors contribute to undergraduate students' protective behaviors. After building multigroup structural equation models using data acquired from the survey taken by 991 undergraduates at a large research university in eastern China, I found that students' COVID-19 awareness was positively associated with their protective behaviors, such as wearing a mask, using hand sanitizer, and maintaining proper social distance, but not with getting vaccinated. In addition, I found students with higher COVID-19 awareness were more likely to have more COVID-19 knowledge than those with less awareness. Furthermore, sex differences were observed in the mediation effects of COVID-19 awareness on wearing a mask and getting vaccinated, via COVID-19 knowledge, respectively. The results of this study have implications in helping higher education stakeholders enact effective measures to prevent the spread of the pandemic.

Evaluation of quality and antimicrobial efficacy of locally manufactured alcohol-based hand sanitizers marketed in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia in the era of COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been rapidly spreading across the globe since the World Health Organization (WHO) has declared the disease outbreak as a global pandemic on March 11, 2020. Hand hygiene, via either regular handwashing with soap and water or using hand sanitizers, is among the various measures that need to be followed to control the outbreak of the disease. Alcohol-based hand sanitizers (ABHS) are the "gold standard" for hand disinfection because of their broad antimicrobial spectrum of activity, easy availability, better safety profile, and general acceptability to users. This study aimed at evaluating the physicochemical quality and antimicrobial efficacy of the locally manufactured ABHS marketed in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was used to collect ABHS from Addis Ababa marketplaces. A total of 25 sample products were randomly selected from different categories of hand sanitizer manufacturers. The physicochemical evaluation of the products was carried out as per the United States Pharmacopoeia and WHO standards. Escherichia coli, Klebsiella spp., Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Staphylococcus aureus, Salmonella spp., and Shigella spp clinical isolates were used for the antimicrobial efficacy test. RESULTS: The Fourier Transform Infrared result confirmed that all the test products met the identification test for ethanol. The majority (68%) of ABHS complied with the test for ethanol content (75-85% v/v). However, only 3 products fulfilled the hydrogen peroxide content (0.112-0.137% v/v). LPC307 showed the maximum zone of inhibition of 12 mm against Escherichia coli whereas MPC204 exhibited only 3 mm. LPC101 was found to be more sensitive to Shigella and Klebsiella Spp with minimum inhibitory concentration values of 20% and 10%, respectively. The sample product LPC101 showed a minimum bactericidal concentration of 20% against Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Klebsiella spp. CONCLUSION: One-third of the tested ABHS did not comply with the WHO ethanol content limit and the majority of the products failed to meet the label claim for hydrogen peroxide content. Besides, nearly all products proved that they have activity against all the tested pathogenic microorganisms at a minimum concentration from 10 to 80%; though, they did not show 99.9% bacteriostatic or bactericidal activities as claimed. The study findings suggested regular monitoring of the quality of marketed ABHS considering the current wide use of these products.

COVID-19, Overzealous Sanitizer Use, and Hair Discoloration: Case Reports.

Proper hand hygiene is one of the top preventive measures against the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). In this study, we report the cases of four patients who presented with blonde discoloration of hair of the dorsal hands and distal forearms during the COVID-19 pandemic. The mean age of participants was 41.25±4.35 years, and 75% percent of them were men. Three patients were medical staff who had to use antiseptics frequently, and one of them was a housewife. In all participants, the primary color of hand hair was black. The duration of sanitizer use was approximately four months (Table 1). One of the patients, a 42-year-old male ophthalmologist, was examined due to the blonde discoloration of hairs of the dorsal hands and distal forearms (Figure 1). The color of the hand and forearms hair had changed to blonde. However, the underlying skin was unaffected. A dermoscopy examination showed lighter hair compared with the natural black hair of unaffected parts. In addition, the hair color of the scalp, upper arms, and other body parts was normal. The patient had frequently used a hand sanitizer that contained 70% ethanol and didecyl dimethyl ammonium chloride (DDAC) for the past five months. The three other patients also had blonde discoloration observable on the hair of dorsal hands. They all reported excessive use of various alcoholic sanitizers. However, they were unaware of other ingredients. In addition, the examination of hair shafts and underlying skin was normal. The COVID-19 pandemic caused an abrupt increase in the use of sanitizers. Hand disinfectants consist of two main categories: non-alcohol-based hand sanitizers and alcohol-based hand sanitizers. The alcohol-based type is an effective measure for the inactivation of enveloped viruses such as coronaviruses (1). It has been shown that percutaneous absorption of alcohol is possible through intact skin. The use of ethanol as a penetration enhancer for pharmaceutical purposes also confirms that ethanol can be absorbed via the skin and be systematically distributed in the body (2). Reisfield et al. observed that intensive use of ethanol-based sanitizers led to an increase in urinary ethanol biomarkers concentrations (3). Alcohols used in various types of gels and solutions are easily released during hand rubbing (4). Ethanol absorption by inhalation should therefore also be taken into account (5). Different pathways of ethanol metabolism can produce free radicals, which affect the antioxidant system (6). In addition, DDAC is also associated with cell growth inhibition and stress oxidative induction (7). Hair discoloration may be a voluntary cosmetic change or a result of chemical or metal exposure. Most unwanted hair discolorations are blonde or white (8). Previous data suggested that an increase in pro-oxidants and a decrease in antioxidants play an important role in hair discoloration. A study performed by Akin Belli et al. demonstrated that hair discoloration is closely related to factors such as emotional stress and alcohol consumption, which cause oxidative stress (9). Hair discoloration might therefore result from oxidative stress induced by ethanol and DDAC used in sanitizers. Golden hair discoloration has been associated with chloride in water. Hypochlorous acid in swimming pool water can penetrate the hair cortex through the cuticle, where it can oxidize and degenerate melanosomes (10). Another possible hypothesis is that the chloride compound in DDAC might be the culprit in sanitizer hair discoloration. Additionally, the bleaching compounds used in some hand disinfectants could be another possible cause of hair discoloration. To the best of our knowledge, this observation of hair discoloration was not previously reported during the COVID-19 outbreak. It is also noteworthy that most hair discoloration normalizes over time (8). The limitations of our study included the fact that the hand sanitizers used by the patients were unavailable and thus their ingredients could not be examined. Furthermore, as most of the sanitizers in this current pandemic are not standardized, they may have unknown ingredients with discoloration properties. Due to the overzealous use of various antiseptics during the pandemic, it is expected that this side-effect will be observed more and more often. Therefore, physicians must be aware of this presentation and reassure the patient regarding this phenomenon. Additionally, products free of such agents should be prescribed to avoid hair discoloration.

Handwashing Practice among Elementary Schoolchildren in Urban Setting, Mongolia: A School-Based Cross-Sectional Survey.

Objectives: Handwashing with soap is the simplest, most affordable, and cost-effective preventative intervention for reducing the burden of communicable diseases, including the COVID-19. This study was aimed at investigating elementary schoolchildren's handwashing practice at two critical moments, namely, before eating and after using the toilet and its associated factors. Methods: The cross-sectional study was conducted at ten public secondary schools in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia, between February and March 2019. Data were collected from all fifth-grade children's parents at the selected schools by using a self-reported questionnaire. Descriptive and multiple regression analyses were conducted using STATA/MP version 13.0. Results: A total of 1507 parents/guardians of 5th-grade school children participated. Reported schoolchildren's handwashing practice for both critical moments was 50.1%. It was significantly associated with female gender (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.56 (95%CI = 0.45, 0.70)), number of siblings (AOR = 0.72 (95%CI = 0.61, 0.80)), and availability of handwashing amenity at school (AOR = 1.1595%CI = 0.86, 1.42)). Only 34% of children wash their hands with soap at school, and the most common reasons for skipping handwashing were an absence of soap (23.9%), lack of sink (14.5%), and the use of hand sanitizer (19.7%). Conclusions: The school children's handwashing practice at two critical moments is considerably low. The main disabling factors of regular handwashing at school included insufficient handwashing facility and soap. Therefore, promoting HW facilities and innovative and participatory education for elementary schoolchildren should be prioritized.

Perceptions and attitudes of dental practitioners towards impacts of Covid 19 pandemic on clinical dentistry: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic challenged all healthcare providers including dental practitioners. This cross-sectional study aimed to investigate the dental practitioners' perceptions and attitudes towards the impacts of COVID-19 on their professional practice, career decision and patient care. METHODS: Data was collected from dental practitioners registered in New South Wales (NSW), Australia using an online survey. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Responses received from 206 dental practitioners revealed their perceptions and attitudes towards COVID-19 infection risk, clinical guidelines, and measures adopted to deliver patient care. Majority of participants perceived the risk of infection in dentistry was higher compared with other health professionals. Most dental practices have followed guidelines received from professional associations and adopted multiple measures such as providing hand sanitizer, social distancing, and risk screen, to ensure safe delivery of oral health care. Over 80% of dental practitioners raised concerns on patients' accessibility to dental care during the pandemic. Despite tele-dentistry was introduced, almost half of the participants did not recognize tele-dentistry as an effective alternative. Moreover, negative impacts of COVID-19 pandemic on dental practitioner's professional career have been reported, including lower practice safety, reduction in working hours and income. Noteworthy, one quarter of participants even considered changing their practice environment, moving sectors or even leaving their career in dentistry. However, majority of the dental practitioners are willing to stay in their current practice environment and continue their career in dentistry. Our observations demonstrate the systematic disruption to dental practice faced in Australia due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Providing dental practitioners with timely educational training and support is important to minimise negative impacts of the challenges and to optimise dental care.

Remote infection control assessments in long-term care facilities during COVID-19 pandemic in Texas, 2020.

BACKGROUND: The Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS) Healthcare Safety Unit (HCSU) conducts remote infection control assessments (tele-ICARs) in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) to evaluate COVID-19 infection prevention and control (IPC) knowledge and practices using a standardized assessment tool. Tele-ICARs are used to gauge different IPC measures specific to SARS-CoV-2 and are either proactive--conducted prior to identified cases--or responsive to an outbreak, which is defined as a new SARS-CoV-2 infection in any staff or any facility-onset infection in a resident. State and local partners use findings from the assessments to aid LTCFs by providing targeted and timely resources and support to mitigate identified gaps. METHODS: Data from tele-ICARs conducted between March 1 and October 30, 2020 were analyzed to assess major gaps across LTCF types. A major gap was defined as 10% or more of facilities not satisfying a specific IPC measure, excluding missing data. Gaps were also assessed by tele-ICAR type: proactive or responsive. Fisher's exact tests and univariate logistic regression were used to characterize significant associations between major IPC gaps and LTCF or tele-ICAR type. RESULTS: DSHS conducted tele-ICARs in 438 LTCFs in Texas during 8 months; 191 were nursing homes/skilled nursing facilities (NH/SNFs), 206 were assisted living facilities (ALFs) and 41 were other settings. Of the assessments, 264 were proactive and 174 responsive. Major gaps identified were: (1) 22% did not have a preference for alcohol-based hand sanitizer (ABHS) over soap and water; (2) 18.1% were not aware of the contact time for disinfectants in use; (3) 17.9% had not stopped resident communal dining; (4) 16.8% did not audit hand hygiene and PPE compliance; and (5) 11.8% had not stopped inter-facility group activities and extra-facility field trips. When restricting analyses to proactive tele-ICARs, one additional gap was identified: 11.1% of facilities lacked a dedicated space to care for or cohort residents with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Significantly more ALFs than NH/SNFs had not suspended resident communal dining (P < .001) nor identified a dedicated space to cohort residents with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (P < .001). Significantly more LTCFs that received a responsive ICAR compared to a proactive ICAR reported a preference for ABHS over soap and water (P = .008) and reported suspending communal dining (P < .001) and group activities (P < .001). Also, significantly more LTCFs that received a responsive ICAR compared to a proactive ICAR had identified a dedicated space to cohort residents with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 (P = .009). CONCLUSIONS: Increased facility education and awareness of federal and state guidelines for group activities and communal dining is warranted in Texas, emphasizing the importance of social distancing for preventing the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in LTCFs, particularly ALFs. CDC recommendations for ABHS versus hand washing should be emphasized, as well as the importance of monitoring and auditing HCP hand hygiene and PPE compliance. Facilities may benefit from additional education and resources about disinfection, to ensure proper selection of disinfectants and understanding of the contact time required for efficacy. Analysis by tele-ICAR type suggests facilities may benefit from identifying space for dedicated COVID-19 units in advance of an outbreak in their facility. Conducting tele-ICARs in LTCFs enables public health agencies to provide direct and individualized feedback to facilities and identify state-wide opportunities for effective interventions in response to SARS-CoV-2.

Assessment of Anti-Bacterial Effectiveness of Hand Sanitizers Commonly Used in South Africa.

Hand sanitizers are used as an alternative to hand washing to reduce the number of viable microorganisms when soap and water are not readily available. This study aimed to investigate the anti-bacterial effectiveness of commercially available hand sanitizers and those commonly used in healthcare and community settings. A mapping exercise was done to select and procure different hand sanitizers (n = 18) from retailers. Five microorganisms implicated in hospital-acquired infections were selected and tested against each hand sanitizer: Escherichia coli, Enterococcus faecalis, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Staphylococcus aureus. Twenty-one volunteers were recruited to do a handprint before and after applying the hand sanitizer. Only four out of eighteen hand sanitizers (22%) were effective against all tested bacterial species, and an equal number (22%) were completely ineffective. Seven hand sanitizers with a label claim of 99.99% were only effective against E. coli. Only five hand sanitizers (27%) effectively reduced bacteria on participants' hands. This study showed that only a fifth of hand sanitizers were effective against selected microorganisms. The findings raise a concern about the effectiveness of hand sanitizers and their role in infection, prevention, and control if not well regulated.

Field experiment of signs promoting hand hygiene during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. public was encouraged to practice good hand hygiene, such as hand washing or the use of hand sanitizer. Young adults reported lower levels of hand hygiene compared to adults of other ages. The aim of the current study was to test the effectiveness of different messages to promote hand sanitizer use among young adults. METHOD: Over a 6-week period, we examined whether 3 brief messages (gain-frame, static descriptive norms, dynamic descriptive norms), placed next to sanitizer dispensers in university residence halls, predicted dispenser use in comparison to dispensers with no sign. Amount of sanitizer usage was measured 3 times per week via the weight of dispenser units. We tracked and controlled for the number of positive COVID-19 cases in residence halls because we expected it might influence sanitizer usage. RESULTS: Compared to no signage, dispensers with signs had 35% greater usage, with the static descriptive norms sign associated with greatest usage (46% compared to no sign), although differences did not reach conventional levels of significance. The strongest predictor of sanitizer use was a residence hall's degree of COVID-19 risk based on the hall's case positivity. CONCLUSIONS: Dispensers with signs had higher use than those without signs, but this difference was not statistically significant. We conclude that compared to prior research, "nudges" such as evidence-based messaging may have had less of an effect on health behavior engagement due to methodological differences across studies or characteristics of the COVID-19 context. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).