COMPARISON BETWEEN TRADITIONAL SURGICAL HAND SCRUBBING WITH POVIDONE-IODINE AND SURGICAL HAND RUBBING WITH PROPAN-2-OL

Abstract

Background: Surgical hand antisepsis is as an effective way to prevent surgical site infection (SSI). Methods involved in the traditional surgical hand scrubbing with povidone iodine (PVI) and surgical hand rubbing with propan-2-ol are widely employed. Its efficacy, timing and associated risk factors are compared in this study.

Study Design: Pilot quasi-experimental study at a Tertiary Care Hospital in Kharian Pakistan

Methods: Two hundred surgical staff were randomized into two groups, Group A (scrubbing PVI) and Group B (Rubbing with propan-2-ol). The bacterial counts were measured before and after antisepsis. Additional evaluation was performed on compliance, skin irritation, and time efficiency. The analysis of data was done using statistical software, and thereafter it was presented through tables, graphs, and pie charts.

Results: Group B led to a significant decrease in bacterial counts and so did the Group A (p > 0.05). In Group B, the average time required for hand antisepsis was less than 1 min, whereas on average 5 min was required in Group A (p<0.001). One percent and two percent of the Group A and Group B, respectively, experienced skin irritation. Nevertheless, compliance was higher in the rubbing group than in the scrubbing group (95 percent vs. 85 percent), respectively.

Conclusion: Propan-2-ol surgical hand rubbing reduces bacterial load as much as traditional PVI scrubbing whilst reducing time, inducing insignificant skin irritation, and better compliance. This implies that, by reverting to alcohol-based hand antisepsis, surgical safety and efficiency will be improved.