不同皮肤消毒剂在献血人群采血前应用效果对比观察

Comparison of the effectiveness of different disinfectants on blood donors before donation

目的比较不同消毒剂对献血人群采血前皮肤消毒的效果。方法选择某中心血站2008年5月—2011年4月无偿献血者240例,按采血前使用皮肤消毒剂的不同,分为碘酊乙醇组、碘伏组及安尔碘组,每组80例。分别于消毒剂使用前后采样,比较3组消毒剂的消毒效果和干燥所需时间。结果碘酊乙醇、碘伏及安尔碘组消毒前后皮肤采样检测细菌总数差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05),消毒后皮肤采样检测细菌总数分别为(0.74±0.36)CFU/cm2、(0.82±0.38)CFU/cm2和(0.65±0.31)CFU/cm2;消毒合格率均达100%;上述3组消毒剂干燥所需时间分别为(76.23±5.31)s、(104.64±6.82)s和(20.41±3.53)s,差异有统计学意义(F=5.703,P<0.05),安尔碘组消毒剂干燥所需时间明显少于碘酊乙醇组和碘伏组。结论安尔碘皮肤消毒剂适用于献血人群采血前的皮肤消毒,消毒效果好,待干时间较短。

Objective To compare disinfectant efficacy of different disinfectants on the skin of blood donors before donation. Methods From May 2008 to April 2011, 240 volunteer blood donors were divided into 3 groups according to the different skin disinfectants used ： iodine tincture and alcohol group, iodophor group, and Anerdian group, there were 80 donors in each group. Samples were taken respectively before and after skin was disinfected , and dis- infectant efficacy as well as disinfectant drying time were compared. Results The total number of bacteria on the skin was not significantly different among three groups before and after disinfection respectively （all P〉0. 05）, af- ter disinfection, bacteria number on the skin of iodine tincture and alcohol group, iodophor group, and Anerdian group were （0. 74 ± 0. 36）CFU/cm2, （0. 82 ± 0. 38）CFU/cm2 and （0. 65 ± 0. 31）CFU/cm2 respectively; the qualified rates of disinfection were all 100% ; disinfectant drying time of three group were （76. 23 ±5.31）seconds, （104. 64 ±6. 82）seconds and（20. 41 ±3.53）seconds, respectively（F= 5. 703,P〈0. 05）, Anerdian group was remarkably shor- ter than the other two groups. Conclusion Anerdian disinfectant is suitable for skin disinfection of blood donors be fore donation,disinfectant efficacy is ideal and disinfectant drying time is short.