CSIRO Publishing blank image blank image blank image blank imageBooksblank image blank image blank image blank imageJournalsblank image blank image blank image blank imageAbout Usblank image blank image blank image blank imageShopping Cartblank image blank image blank image You are here: Journals > Healthcare Infection   
Healthcare Infection
  Official Journal of the Australasian College for Infection Prevention and Control
blank image Search
blank image blank image
blank image
  Advanced Search

Journal Home
About the Journal
Editorial Structure
Online Early
Current Issue
Just Accepted
All Issues
Special Issues
Sample Issue
For Authors
General Information
Submit Article
Author Instructions
For Referees
Referee Guidelines
Review an Article
Annual Referee Index
For Subscribers
Customer Service
Print Publication Dates
For Advertisers

blue arrow e-Alerts
blank image
Subscribe to our Email Alert or RSS feeds for the latest journal papers.

red arrow Connect with HI
blank image

red arrow Connect with CP
blank image
facebook twitter LinkedIn

red arrow COPE Member
blank image
This journal is a member of, and subscribes to the principles of, the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) CopeLogo


Article << Previous     |     Next >>   Contents Vol 17(2)

Antimicrobial efficacies of chlorhexidine gluconate–alcohols and a povidone–iodine solution as skin preparations in vivo

Yutaka Nishihara A C, Takumi Kajiura A, Katsuhiro Yokota A, Hiroyoshi Kobayashi B and Takashi Okubo B

A Yoshida Pharmaceutical Company Ltd, Research & Development Division, Tokyo, Japan.
B Tokyo Healthcare University, Postgraduate School, Tokyo, Japan.
C Corresponding author. Email: nishihara_yutaka@yoshida-pharm.co.jp

Healthcare Infection 17(2) 52-56 http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/HI12006
Submitted: 14 February 2012  Accepted: 11 April 2012   Published: 22 May 2012

PDF (140 KB) $25
 Export Citation

The main purpose of the study was to compare the antimicrobial efficacy of chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG)–alcohols and a povidone–iodine (PVP–I) solution on the skin. The efficacy on the antecubital fossa, the abdomen and the inguen was evaluated to a maximum of 24 h after treatment by testing 74 healthy adult subjects according to an ASTM standard method. Relative to baseline microbial populations, all products produced significant reductions in population at all sites (P < 0.05). A blocked, two-factor ANOVA showed that the performance (mean log10 reduction values) on inguinal sites at 24 h (2.63 for 1% CHG–ethanol, 3.25 for 2% CHG–isopropanol preparation and 2.29 for PVP–I solution) was not significantly different at any time after treatment (P > 0.05); this applied equally at the other sites tested. Given that Japanese pharmaceutical regulations limit CHG content in antiseptics to a maximum of 1%, it would be reasonable to expect that a 1% CHG–ethanol skin preparation could be chosen in Japan that would perform well and have promising potential for catheter preparation and/or maintenance preparation.

Additional keywords: catheter-related bloodstream infection, CDC Guidelines, CRBSI, skin preparation.


[1]  Garibaldi RA, Skolnick D, Lerer T, Poirot A, Graham J, Krisuinas E, et al The impact of preoperative skin disinfection on preventing intraoperative wound contamination. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1988; 9: 109–13.
CrossRef | CAS |

[2]  Crosby CT, Mares AK. Skin antisepsis: past, present and future. J Vasc Access Devices 2001; 6: 26–31.
CrossRef |

[3]  Food and Drug Administration Tentative Final Monograph for Health-Care Antiseptic Drug Products; Proposed Rules. Fed Regist 1994; 59: 31401–52.

[4]  Paulson DS. Handbook of Topical Antimicrobials. Industrial Applications in Consumer Products and Pharmaceuticals. New York: Marcel Dekker; 2003.

[5]  O’Grady NP, Alexander M, Patchen Dellinger E, Gerberding JL, Heard SO, Maki DG, et al Guidelines for the prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2002; 23: 759–69.
CrossRef |

[6]  O’Grady NP, Alexander M, Burns LA, Patchen Dellinger E, Garland J, Heard SO, et al. CDC Guideline for the Prevention of Intravascular Catheter-Related Infections. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2011. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/hicpac/BSI/BSI-guidelines-2011.html [verified 26 April 2012].

[7]  Nihon Seiyaku Dantai Rengokai. Iryoyou-Iyakuhin Saihyouka no Goannai. 1985; 24: 3739 [in Japanese].

[8]  ASTM standard E1173-01. Standard Test Method for Evaluation of Preoperative, Precatheterization, or Preinjection Skin Preparations. ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA; 2009.

[9]  ASTM Standard E1054-08. Standard Test Method for Evaluation of Preoperative, Precatheterization, or Preinjection Skin Preparations. ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA; 2008.

[10]  Holtz TH, Wenzel RP. Post discharge surveillance for nosocomial wound infection: a brief review and commentary. Am J Infect Control 1992; 20: 206–13.
CrossRef | CAS |

[11]  Kampf G, Kramer A. Epidemiologic background of hand hygiene and evaluation of the most important agents for scrubs and rubs. Clin Microbiol Rev 2004; 17: 863–93.
CrossRef |

[12]  Lilly HA, Lowbury EJL, Wilkins MD. Detergents compared with each other and with antiseptics as skin “degerming” agents. J Hyg (Lond) 1979; 82: 89–93.
CrossRef | CAS |

[13]  Pottinger JM, Starks SE, Steelman VM. Skin preparation. Perioper Nurs Clin 2006; 1: 203–10.
CrossRef |

[14]  Kampf G, Ostermeyer C, Heeg P, Paulson DS. Evaluation of two methods of determining the efficacies of two alcohol-based hand rubs for surgical hand antisepsis. Appl Environ Microbiol 2006; 72: 3856–61.
CrossRef | CAS |

[15]  Paulson D. Hand scrub products – performance requirements versus clinical relevance. AORN J 2004; 80: 225–34.
CrossRef |

[16]  Rotter M, Sattar S, Dharan S, Allegranzi B, Mathai E, Pittet D. Methods to evaluate the microbial activities of hand-rub and hand-wash agents. J Hosp Infect 2009; 73: 191–9.
CrossRef | CAS |

[17]  Maki DG, Knasinski V, Narans LL. A Randomized Trial of a Novel 1% Chlorhexidine–75% Alcohol Tincture vs. 10% Povidone–Iodine for Cutaneous Disinfection with Vascular Catheters. Toronto: Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America; 2001.

[18]  Humar A, Ostromecki A, Direnfeld J, Marshal JC, Lazar N, Houston PC, et al Prospective randomized trial of 10% povidone–iodine versus 0.5% tincture of chlorhexidine as cutaneous antisepsis for prevention of central venous catheter infection. Clin Infect Dis 2000; 31: 1001–7.
CrossRef | CAS |

[19]  Vallés J, Fernandez I, Alcaraz D, Chacón E, Carzorla A, Canals M, et al Prospective randomized trial of 3 antiseptic solutions for prevention of catheter colonization in an intensive care unit for adult patients. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2008; 29: 847–53.
CrossRef |

[20]  Reichel M, Heisig P, Kohlmann T, Kampf G. Alcohols for skin antisepsis at clinically relevant skin sites. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2009; 53: 4778–82.
CrossRef | CAS |

[21]  Hibbard JS, Mulberry GK, Brady AR. A clinical study comparing the skin antisepsis and safety of chloraprep, 70% isopropyl alcohol, and 2% aqueous chlorhexidine. J Infus Nurs 2002; 25: 244–9.
CrossRef |

[22]  Leyden JJ, McGinley KJ, Foglia AN, Wahrman JE, Gropper CN, Vowels BR. A new method for in vivo evaluation of antimicrobial agents by translocation of complex dense populations of cutaneous bacteria. Skin Pharmacol 1996; 9: 60–8.
CrossRef | CAS |

[23]  Maki DG, Ringer M, Alvarado CJ. Prospective, randomized trial of povidone–iodine, alcohol, and chlorhexidine for prevention of infection associated with central venous and arterial catheters. Lancet 1991; 338: 339–43.
CrossRef | CAS |

[24]  Chaiyakunapruk N, Veenstra DL, Lipsky BA, Saint S. Chlorhexidine compared with povidone–iodine solution for vascular catheter-site care: a meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 2002; 136: 792–801.
| CAS |

[25]  Darouiche R, Wall M, Itani M, Itani KMF, Otterson MF, Webb AL, et al Chlorhexidine–alcohol versus povidone–iodine for surgical-site antisepsis. N Engl J Med 2010; 362: 18–26.
CrossRef | CAS |

[26]  Swenson BR, Hendrick TL, Metzger R, Bonatti H, Pruett TL, Sawyer RG. Effects of preoperative skin preparation on postoperative wound infection rates: A prospective study of 3 skin preparation protocols. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2009; 30: 964–71.
CrossRef |

[27]  Tanimura H, Okubo T. Antisepsis effect of insertion site of central venous catheter. Jpn J Environ Infect 2010; 25: 281–5.
CrossRef |

Subscriber Login

Legal & Privacy | Contact Us | Help


© CSIRO 1996-2015