QUATS VS CDC RECOMMENDATION OF ALCOHOL-BASED SANITIZERS BASOLINK. Basolink International Company LLC.

Transcription

1 QUATS VS CDC RECOMMENDATION OF ALCOHOL-BASED SANITIZERS BASOLINK We care your living quality Basolink International Company LLC. Tel/Fax: (425)

2 How do hospital purchasing agents, administrators, risk-assessment managers, nursing groups or those that have an interest in non-alcohol sanitizers address the CDC recommendation of alcohol-based sanitizers? It is a pressing question, as the debate on alcohol sanitizers is not an 'open and closed' issue. Problems with hand drying and misuse, as well as other safety concerns, have led many who use alcohol-based sanitizers to search for a viable alternative. CDC Recommendation: The CDC's "Guideline for Hand Hygiene in Health-Care Settings" (October 25, 2002) is the most current information available. These recommendations are not likely to be updated for several years. The CDC's 2002 guideline task force apparently made decisions of publication based on certain criteria and test results that were available during that time period. However, since its publication, great strides in chemistry have taken place. These detailed studies indicate that other agents may be equally, if not more, effective than alcohol-based sanitizers. Of these, Quaternary Ammonium Compounds (QUATS) have shown amazing potential. QUATS are now considered more efficacious than alcohol based sanitizers in the removal of bacteria and in persistent kill rate. Persistent kill rate refers to the amount of time a product is considered effective, or, how long it continues to kill the bacteria on the area of application. The problem with the aforementioned "guideline" from the CDC is that it is only a recommendation of alcohol-based sanitizers (i.e., hand rubs, sanitizers, and other antibacterial agents). It is not a requirement, as defined by the CDC. Take this into consideration: Webster's Dictionary defines a recommendation as; "worthy of confidence, acceptance or beneficial". If you were to review test data and select a sanitizer, you would find it easy to embrace other alcohol free options -options that meet and exceed the criteria set by the FDA and CDC. Thus, you may select a sanitizer based on current scientific information rather than a past (2002) recommendation. Those responsible for purchasing sanitizers could assess and compare the test results, both lab and in practice, of both alcohol-based sanitizers and QUATS. The test results clearly indicate that QUATS are vastly superior in every respect. With that in context, let it be known that Quaternary Ammonium Compounds easily exceed criteria previously used to meet a CDC "recommendation". 1

3 Effective Protocol? The most important component to the alcohol/non-alcohol debate is not solely product effectiveness. It is the ultimate protection of families and Health Care Workers (HCWs). We cannot forget those who will apply such products on a daily basis. Recent surveys indicate that families and HCWs are considered with product efficacy and skin health in mind. Alcoholbased sanitizers are effective for short durations and repeated applications typically destroy the skin. Those in the industry have been told that HCWs suffering such damage to the hands may, at times, shortcut use protocols. Professionals may not apply the product as often and may not wash hands for the recommended time frame. Statistics of use will, therefore, show a low cost per use and infection control is left with the quandary of why the infection rate is up and alcohol-based sanitizer use is constant. If alcohol had some persistence of action (persistent kill rate), there would be less of a problem. But it does not. Moreover, the CDC protocol indicates that for alcohol-based sanitizers to effectively, they must be wet on the skin for a minimum of 30 Seconds and after 60 seconds effective. Studies show that HCWs apply hand sanitizers for an average of 15 seconds. Again, the moment an alcohol-based product dries there is no further antibacterial activity. The improper use of alcohol-based sanitizers has undoubtedly contributed to the beginning of today's hospital problem with MRSA and VRE, as well as other deadly strains of bacteria. Alcohol Dangers: For alcohol-based sanitizers to be truly effective they must be formulated to contain at least 60% alcohol. This poses serious threats to our well-being. As you know, alcohol is extremely flammable. There have been reports of fires fueled by alcohol-based sanitizers. Local fire codes also come into play regarding where dispensers can be placed and where product is stored. Alcohol is also an intoxicant. For this reason alone, many institutions have removed alcoholbased sanitizers from psych and pediatric wards for fear of intentional or accidental ingestion by patients. There are documented cases of children becoming intoxicated from ingesting alcohol-based sanitizers. 2

4 The Bottom Line: When Health Care Workers use non-alcohol sanitizers, particularly those containing QUATS, there is no rise in cost -peruse. There is, however, a significant reduction in the topical spread of infectious bacteria. Both MRSA and VRE are killed in 15 seconds or less and the antibacterial action can persist for over four hours. Consumers and HCWs also report that lotions containing QUATS feel better on their hands. They can use such products repeatedly with no fear of drying and cracking of hands. With these findings you can be confident in knowing that you have a successful infection control program in place that is paramount in both comfort and control. Our product, Fresh Protect Sanitizing Lotion, kills 99.99% of germs in 15 seconds and has a lab demonstrated persistence of 4 hours. It softens and moisturizes hands, as well -a benefit that families and professionals appreciate. By considering Fresh Protect and the above mentioned information, you can be assured of meeting the criteria established by the FDA and the CDC on the selection of hand sanitizers. We believe that Fresh Protect Sanitizing Lotion is the right choice for HCWs, hospitals, and other medical and dental clinics. Please request a sample and prove it to your professionals and your family. If you are a contract buyer, we can help you write the bid specifications to conform to a larger base of suppliers and still meet CDC and FDA guidelines. 3

5 Cost-per-use of Fresh Protect Sanitizing Lotion vs. alcohol-based sanitizers When HCWs (Health Care Workers) use non-alcohol sanitizers, particularly those containing QUATS, there is NO rise in cost-per-use. There is, however, a significant reduction in the topical spread of infectious bacteria. HCWs also report that lotions containing QUATS feel better on their hands. They can use such products repeatedly with no fear of drying and cracking of hands. We agree that cost-per-use is important. However, when compared to alcohol-based antibacterial hand cleansers, Fresh Protect Sanitizing Lotion will cost less. Fresh Protect Sanitizing Lotion-is a quat-based sanitizer. Why? Think about it. If you had to treat your hands with a product that kills the hands, makes them dry and make them bleed, you would not use it. And that is just what is happening with the alcohol-based antibacterial hand sanitizers. Some people say they are using the alcohol-based sanitizers but often are really not using them...because it hurts. As a result', the cost-per-use looks very good for alcohol-based sanitizers but they are actually higher than Fresh Protect Sanitizing Lotion. When all things are considered, the comparison is sobering. The CDC published the 'Guideline for Hand Hygiene in Health-Care Settings' on October 25, The amount needed is stated clearly on page 8 paragraph 1. The protocol amount of alcohol based product needed to sanitize the hands is 3 ml rubbed into the hands for 30 seconds, followed by a repeat application for the same duration. HCWs do not generally follow the CDC protocol for alcohol-based sanitizers. They spend under 15 seconds and generally use 1 ml of product. This usage pattern will not accomplish anything more than moving the bacteria around. It will not kill the bacteria. Fresh Protect Sanitizing Lotion only requires 1 ml rubbed into the hands until dry (usually 15 seconds). Plus, alcohol-based sanitizers have no persistence and must be reapplied very often, whereas, Fresh Protect Sanitizing Lotion persists for over 4 hours and only needs to be reapplied after wash-off or visibly soiled hands. Here are the facts: *The per-use amount of alcohol-based sanitizers is three times as much if the HCWs use the CDC protocol. *Fresh Protect may cost more per bottle but goes further by about 50%. *Fresh Protect does not have to be applied as often. The time saved by not having to reapply is significant. *A significant reduction in the topical spread of infectious bacteria can be assured by the use of Fresh Protect Sanitizing Lotion vs. alcohol-based sanitizers. *Fresh Protect Sanitizing Lotion is actually less expensive than alcohol-based sanitizers. 4