三种洗手用品洗手效果比较

摘要

Objective To compare the hand-washing effects of traditional soap, hand sanitizer, waterless hand sanitizer used by clinical medical workers. Methods The effects of three hand-washing products received bacteriological monitoring and statistical analysis. Results The average bacterial counts of soap, hand sanitizer, waterless hand sanitizer were 10.1cfu/cm2, 8.3cfu/cm2 and 3.6cfu/cm2. Conclusion The hand-washing effect of waterless hand sanitizer is better than that of traditional soap and hand sanitizer, and it's convenient, fast and highly effective, thereby worthy of wide clinical promotion.%目的：比较临床医护人员使用传统的肥皂、洗手液、无水洗手液三种洗手用品洗手的效果。方法分别对三种洗手用品的效果进行细菌学监测并作统计学分析。结果肥皂、洗手液、无水洗手液洗手后平均菌数分别为10.1cfu/cm2、8.3cfu/cm2和3.6cfu/cm2。结论无水洗手液洗手效果优于传统的肥皂和洗手液，且方便、快速、高效，值得临床广泛推广。