Disinfectant effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 and influenza viruses present on human skin: model-based evaluation.

OBJECTIVES: Disinfection effectiveness against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) on human skin remains unclear because of the hazards of viral exposure. An evaluation model, which has been previously generated using human skin obtained from forensic autopsy samples, accurately mimics in vivo skin conditions for evaluating the effectiveness of disinfection against the virus. Using this model, we evaluated disinfection effectiveness against viruses on human skin. METHODS: Ethanol (EA), isopropanol (IPA), chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) and benzalkonium chloride (BAC) were used as target disinfectants. First, disinfectant effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 and influenza A virus (IAV) was evaluated in vitro. Disinfectant effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 and IAV on human skin was then evaluated by titrating viruses present on the skin after applying each disinfectant on the skin for 5-60 seconds. RESULTS: Both, SARS-CoV-2 and IAV on human skin were completely inactivated within 5 seconds by 40%-80% EA and 70% IPA (log reduction values (LRVs) were >4). However, SARS-CoV-2 and IAV were barely inactivated by 20% EA (LRVs were <1). In vitro evaluation showed that, compared with EA and IPA, CHG and BAC were significantly inferior in terms of disinfection effectiveness. Conversely, the disinfection effectiveness of CHG and BAC against SARS-CoV-2 was higher on human skin than in vitro, and increased with increases in their concentration and reaction time (LRVs of 0.2% CHG/0.05% BAC were >2, and LRVs of 1.0% CHG/0.2% BAC were >2.5). CONCLUSIONS: Proper hand hygiene practices using alcohol-based disinfectants such as EA/IPA effectively inactivate SARS-CoV-2 and IAV on human skin.

Pediatric Eye Injuries by Hydroalcoholic Gel in the Context of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic.

Importance: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has made alcohol-based hand sanitizers (ABHS) widely available in public places. This may warrant determining whether cases of unintentional ocular exposure are increasing, especially in children. Objective: To describe the epidemiologic trend of pediatric eye exposures to ABHS and to report the severity of the ocular lesions. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective case series conducted from April 1, 2020, to August 24, 2020. Cases were retrieved from the national database of the French Poison Control Centers (PCC) and from a pediatric ophthalmology referral hospital in Paris, France. Cases of ocular exposure to chemical agents in children younger than 18 years during the study period were reviewed. Cases of ABHS exposure were included. Exposures: The following data were collected: age, sex, circumstances of exposure, symptoms, size of the epithelial defect at first examination, time between the incident and re-epithelialization, and medical and/or surgical management. Main Outcomes and Measures: Comparison of the number of eye exposures to ABHS in children between April to August 2020 and April to August 2019. Results: Between April 1 and August 24, 2020, there were 7 times more pediatric cases of ABHS eye exposures reported in the PCC database compared with the same period in 2019 (9.9% of pediatric eye exposures in 2020 vs 1.3% in 2019; difference, 8.6%; 95% CI, 7.4-9.9; P < .001). The number of cases occurring in public places increased in 2020 (from 16.4% in May to 52.4% in August). Similarly, admissions to the eye hospital for ABHS exposure increased at the same period (16 children in 2020 including 10 boys; mean [SD] age, 3.5 [1.4] years vs 1 boy aged 16 months in 2019). Eight of them presented with a corneal and/or conjunctival ulcer, involving more than 50% of the corneal surface for 6 of them. Two cases required amniotic membrane transplant. Conclusions and Relevance: These data support the likelihood of an increasing number of unintentional ocular exposures to ABHS in the pediatric population. To maintain good public compliance with hand disinfection, these findings support that health authorities should ensure the safe use of these devices and warn the parents and caregivers about their potential danger for children.

Inactivation of Severe Acute Respiratory Coronavirus Virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and Diverse RNA and DNA Viruses on Three-Dimensionally Printed Surgical Mask Materials.

BACKGROUND: Personal protective equipment (PPE) is a critical need during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Alternative sources of surgical masks, including 3-dimensionally (3D) printed approaches that may be reused, are urgently needed to prevent PPE shortages. Few data exist identifying decontamination strategies to inactivate viral pathogens and retain 3D-printing material integrity. OBJECTIVE: To test viral disinfection methods on 3D-printing materials. METHODS: The viricidal activity of common disinfectants (10% bleach, quaternary ammonium sanitizer, 3% hydrogen peroxide, or 70% isopropanol and exposure to heat (50°C, and 70°C) were tested on four 3D-printed materials used in the healthcare setting, including a surgical mask design developed by the Veterans' Health Administration. Inactivation was assessed for several clinically relevant RNA and DNA pathogenic viruses, including severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1). RESULTS: SARS-CoV-2 and all viruses tested were completely inactivated by a single application of bleach, ammonium quaternary compounds, or hydrogen peroxide. Similarly, exposure to dry heat (70°C) for 30 minutes completely inactivated all viruses tested. In contrast, 70% isopropanol reduced viral titers significantly less well following a single application. Inactivation did not interfere with material integrity of the 3D-printed materials. CONCLUSIONS: Several standard decontamination approaches effectively disinfected 3D-printed materials. These approaches were effective in the inactivation SARS-CoV-2, its surrogates, and other clinically relevant viral pathogens. The decontamination of 3D-printed surgical mask materials may be useful during crisis situations in which surgical mask supplies are limited.

COVID-19 global pandemic planning: Performance and electret charge of N95 respirators after recommended decontamination methods.

Shortages of N95 respirators for use by medical personnel have driven consideration of novel conservation strategies, including decontamination for reuse and extended use. Decontamination methods listed as promising by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (vaporous hydrogen peroxide (VHP), wet heat, ultraviolet irradiation (UVI)) and several methods considered for low resource environments (bleach, isopropyl alcohol and detergent/soap) were studied for two commonly used surgical N95 respirators (3M™ 1860 and 1870+ Aura™). Although N95 filtration performance depends on the electrostatically charged electret filtration layer, the impact of decontamination on this layer is largely unexplored. As such, respirator performance following decontamination was assessed based on the fit, filtration efficiency, and pressure drop, along with the relationship between (1) surface charge of the electret layer, and (2) elastic properties of the straps. Decontamination with VHP, wet heat, UVI, and bleach did not degrade fit and filtration performance or electret charge. Isopropyl alcohol and soap significantly degraded fit, filtration performance, and electret charge. Pressure drop across the respirators was unchanged. Modest degradation of N95 strap elasticity was observed in mechanical fatigue testing, a model for repeated donnings and doffings. CDC recommended decontamination methods including VHP, wet heat, and UV light did not degrade N95 respirator fit or filtration performance in these tests. Extended use of N95 respirators may degrade strap elasticity, but a loss of face seal integrity should be apparent during user seal checks. NIOSH recommends performing user seal checks after every donning to detect loss of appropriate fit. Decontamination methods which degrade electret charge such as alcohols or detergents should not be used on N95 respirators. The loss of N95 performance due to electret degradation would not be apparent to a respirator user or evident during a negative pressure user seal check.

Contact Dermatitis from Hand Hygiene Practices in the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to spread globally at a staggering speed. At present, there is no effective treatment or vaccine for COVID-19. Hand disinfection is a cost-effective way to prevent its transmission. According to the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines, we should wash our hands with soap and water for at least 20 seconds. If soap and water are not readily available, alcohol-based hand rubs (ABHRs) with at least 60% alcohol are the alternative. With diligent hand disinfection reinforced during COVID-19, there is an increased prevalence of contact dermatitis. This commentary highlights the fact that contact dermatitis is a readily treatable condition and should not cause any deviation of proper hand hygiene. In irritant contact dermatitis (ICD), the management strategies are selection of less irritating hand hygiene products, frequent use of moisturisers to rebuild the skin barrier, and education on proper hand hygiene practices. In allergic contact dermatitis (ACD), the identification and avoidance of the contact allergen is the key to treatment. However, ACD is less common and only accounts for 20% of the cases. The identified allergens in hand cleansers are predominantly preservative excipients and ACD attributable to ABHR are very uncommon. Alcohol-free hand rubs are widely available on the market but it is not a recommended alternative to ABHRs by the CDC.

Disulfiram Ethanol Reaction with Alcohol-Based Hand Sanitizer: An Exploratory Study.

AIMS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey to estimate the prevalence and clinical manifestation of disulfiram ethanol reaction (DER) and isopropanol toxicity (IT) in patients with alcohol use disorders, on disulfiram. Alcohol-based hand rub contains either ethanol or isopropanol or both. COVID-19 pandemic has led to wide scale usage of sanitizers. Patients with alcohol use disorders, on disulfiram, might experience disulfiram ethanol like reactions with alcohol-based sanitizers. METHODS: We telephonically contacted 339 patients, prescribed disulfiram between January 2014 and March 2020. The assessment pertained to the last 3 months (i.e. third week of March to third week of June 2020). RESULT: The sample consisted of middle-aged men with a mean 16 years of alcohol dependence. Among the 82 (24%) patients adherent to disulfiram, 42 (12.3%) were using alcohol-based hand rubs. Out of these, a total of eight patients (19%; 95% CI 9-33) had features suggestive of DER; four of whom also had features indicative of IT. Five patients (62.5%) had mild and self-limiting symptoms. Severe systemic reactions were experienced by three (37.5%). Severe reactions were observed with exposure to sanitizers in greater amounts, on moist skin or through inhalation. CONCLUSION: Patients on disulfiram should be advised to use alternate methods of hand hygiene.

Putatively lethal ingestion of isopropyl alcohol-related case: interpretation of post mortem isopropyl alcohol and acetone concentrations remains challenging.

Isopropyl alcohol, or propan-2-ol (IPA), is found in numerous chemicals including alcohol-based hand rubs whose use has been recently widely extended to the general population since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. This widespread of IPA use could potentially, but not necessarily, be responsible for an increase in IPA poisoning cases (e.g., in alcoholics and/or for suicide attempt, even more in a lockdown situation). Forensic identification of IPA-related fatalities remains challenging as IPA post mortem detection can also result from antemortem or post mortem production, or post mortem contamination. In order to illustrate this issue, we report the case of a 33-year-old man found dead with a bottle of pure IPA liquid close to him. Toxicological positive results only consisted in IPA (464, 260, 465 and 991 mg/L) and acetone (1560, 2340, 3040 and 1360 mg/L) in blood, vitreous humour, urine and bile, respectively (determinations using headspace gas chromatography with flame ionization detection). These IPA absolute concentrations and IPA-to-acetone ratios appear inferior to those usually reported in the literature (higher than 1000 mg/L and 1.1, respectively) in IPA poisoning cases. In conclusion, this death can be cautiously regarded as an IPA ingestion-related fatality in the hypothesis of a survival time which have promoted IPA metabolism to acetone: this hypothesis is supported by the putative limited IPA-ingested dose. This report emphasizes the fact that post mortem IPA and acetone concentration interpretation involves to take account of (i) results in multiple biological specimens, (ii) complete case history, and (iii) a search of possible IPA presence at the scene of death.

Toxicological aspects of increased use of surface and hand disinfectants in Croatia during the COVID-19 pandemic: a preliminary report.

All COVID-19 prevention strategies include regular use of surface disinfectants and hand sanitisers. As these measures took hold in Croatia, the Croatian Poison Control Centre started receiving phone calls from the general public and healthcare workers, which prompted us to investigate whether the risk of suspected/symptomatic poisonings with disinfectants and sanitisers really increased. To that end we compared their frequency and characteristics in the first half of 2019 and 2020. Cases of exposures to disinfectants doubled in the first half of 2020 (41 vs 21 cases in 2019), and exposure to sanitisers increased about nine times (46 vs 5 cases in 2019). In 2020, the most common ingredients of disinfectants and sanitisers involved in poisoning incidents were hypochlorite/glutaraldehyde, and ethanol/isopropyl alcohol, respectively. Exposures to disinfectants were recorded mostly in adults (56 %) as accidental (78 %) through ingestion or inhalation (86 %). Fortunately, most callers were asymptomatic (people called for advice because they were concerned), but nearly half reported mild gastrointestinal or respiratory irritation, and in one case severe symptoms were reported (gastrointestinal corrosive injury). Reports of exposure to hand sanitisers highlighted preschool children as the most vulnerable group. Accidental exposure through ingestion dominated, but, again, only mild symptoms (gastrointestinal or eye irritation) developed in one third of the cases. These preliminary findings, however limited, confirm that increased availability and use of disinfectants and sanitisers significantly increased the risk of poisoning, particularly in preschool children through accidental ingestion of hand sanitisers. We therefore believe that epidemiological recommendations for COVID-19 prevention should include warnings informing the general public of the risks of poisoning with surface and hand disinfectants in particular.

Efficacies of the original and modified World Health Organization-recommended hand-rub formulations.

The World Health Organization (WHO) hand-rub formulations have been in use around the world for at least the past 10 years. The advent of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has further enhanced their use. We reviewed published efficacy data for the original and modified formulations. Only efficacy data according to the European Norms (EN) were found. The bactericidal efficacy of the original formulations was, under practical conditions, partly insufficient (EN 1500, only effective in 60 s; EN 12791, efficacy too low in 5 min). The first modification with higher alcohol concentrations improves their efficacy as hygienic hand rub (effective in 30 s). The second (0.725% glycerol) and third (0.5% glycerol) modification improves their efficacy for surgical hand preparation (effective in 5 and 3 min). The original and second modified formulations were tested and demonstrate activity against enveloped viruses including severe acute resiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in 30 s. The ethanol-based formulation is also active against some non-enveloped test viruses in 60 s (suspension tests, EN 14476). In-vivo data on the formulations would provide a more reliable result on the virucidal efficacy on contaminated hands but are currently not available. Nevertheless, the most recent modifications should be adopted for use in healthcare.

Synergistic effects of anionic surfactants on coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) virucidal efficiency of sanitizing fluids to fight COVID-19.

Our surrounding environment, especially often-touched contaminated surfaces, plays an important role in the transmission of pathogens in society. The shortage of effective sanitizing fluids, however, became a global challenge quickly after the coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) outbreak in December 2019. In this study, we present the effect of surfactants on coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) virucidal efficiency in sanitizing fluids. Sodium dodecylbenzenesulfonate (SDBS), sodium laureth sulfate (SLS), and two commercial dish soap and liquid hand soap were studied with the goal of evaporation rate reduction in sanitizing liquids to maximize surface contact time. Twelve fluids with different recipes composed of ethanol, isopropanol, SDBS, SLS, glycerin, and water of standardized hardness (WSH) were tested for their evaporation time and virucidal efficiency. Evaporation time increased by 17-63% when surfactant agents were added to the liquid. In addition, surfactant incorporation enhanced the virucidal efficiency between 15 and 27% according to the 4-field test in the EN 16615:2015 European Standard method. Most importantly, however, we found that surfactant addition provides a synergistic effect with alcohols to inactivate the SARS-CoV-2 virus. This study provides a simple, yet effective solution to improve the virucidal efficiency of commonly used sanitizers.

A Case Report of Isopropanol Ingestion During the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with substance use disorder may be particularly vulnerable to withdrawal-related complications during the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic. Limited availability of alcohol and other substances coupled with decreased accessibility to substance use treatment poses a substantial risk to this population. Isopropanol, the active ingredient in rubbing alcohol, is widely available; thus, it may be used in times of scarcity. CASE REPORT: We present a case of intentional isopropanol ingestion used as an ethanol surrogate within the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Toxic alcohol ingestions are imperative considerations on the differential for the intoxicated patient particularly during resource-limited times.