The Hygienic Efficacy of Different Hand-Drying Methods: A Review of the Evidence

School of Public Health and Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Mayo Clinic Proceedings (Impact Factor: 6.26). 05/2012; 87(8):791-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2012.02.019
Source: PubMed


The transmission of bacteria is more likely to occur from wet skin than from dry skin; therefore, the proper drying of hands after washing should be an integral part of the hand hygiene process in health care. This article systematically reviews the research on the hygienic efficacy of different hand-drying methods. A literature search was conducted in April 2011 using the electronic databases PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Search terms used were hand dryer and hand drying. The search was limited to articles published in English from January 1970 through March 2011. Twelve studies were included in the review. Hand-drying effectiveness includes the speed of drying, degree of dryness, effective removal of bacteria, and prevention of cross-contamination. This review found little agreement regarding the relative effectiveness of electric air dryers. However, most studies suggest that paper towels can dry hands efficiently, remove bacteria effectively, and cause less contamination of the washroom environment. From a hygiene viewpoint, paper towels are superior to electric air dryers. Paper towels should be recommended in locations where hygiene is paramount, such as hospitals and clinics.

Download full-text


Available from: Cunrui Huang, Dec 17, 2013
  • Source
    • "Those who had access for individual towel/tissue paper for drying in their ward is 2 times more likely compliance HH than who had not access. Which is in line with study done in Australia, the presence of hand drier will improve HHC [20]. This might be the health care providers frightened that the wet hand will more contaminates than dry hand. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Health care associated infections are more predominant in developing countries where Hand hygiene compliance is associated with so many factors. However, these factors have not been studied so far in the study area. This study sought to determine Hand hygiene compliance and associated factors among health care providers. Institution based cross-sectional study was conducted from April to May, 2013 in Gondar University Hospital. Stratified sampling technique was used to select 405 health care providers. Standardized questionnaire and world health organization observational checklist was used to collect the data. Data was entered and analyzed by using SPSS version 20. Descriptive statistics and binary logistic regression model was used to summarize the result. A total of 405 study participants were interviewed and observed with a response rate of 96.4%. Good Hand hygiene compliance of healthcare providers was found to be 16.5%. Having knowledge about hand hygiene compliance , (AOR = 3.80, 95%CI 1.60, 8.97), getting training (AOR = 2.60, 95%Cl 1.21, 5.62), the presence of individual towel/tissue paper (AOR = 1.91, 95% CI 1.03, 3.56) presence of alcohol based hand rub for Hand hygiene compliance(AOR = 6.58, 95% CI 2.67, 16.22) and knew the presence of infection prevention committees (AOR = 2.6, 95% CI 1.23, 5.37) were significantly associated with hand hygiene compliance . Hand hygiene compliance among health care providers in Gondar University Hospital was found to be low. It is better to give training on Hand hygiene compliance and provide Alcohol based hand rub and individual towel or tissue paper for hand hygiene compliance .
    BMC Public Health 01/2014; 14(1):96. DOI:10.1186/1471-2458-14-96 · 2.26 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Aims: This study compared the potential for cross contamination of the surrounding environment resulting from two different hand-drying methods: paper towels and the use of an air blade dryer. Methods and results: One hundred volunteers for each method washed their hands and dried them using one of the two methods. Bacterial contamination of the surrounding environment was measured using settle plates placed on the floor in a grid pattern, air sampling and surface swabs. Both drying methods produced ballistic droplets in the immediate vicinity of the hand-drying process. The air blade dryer produced a larger number of droplets which were dispersed over a larger area. Settle plates showed increased microbial contamination in the grid squares which were affected by ballistic droplets. Using the settle plates counts, it was estimated that approx. 1.7 × 10(5) cfu more micro-organisms were left on the laboratory floor (total area approx. 17.15 m(2)) after 100 volunteers used an air blade dryer compared to when paper towels were used. Conclusions: The two drying methods led to different patterns of ballistic droplets and levels of microbial contamination under heavy use conditions. Whilst the increase in microbial levels in the environment is not significant if only nonpathogenic micro-organisms are spread, it may increase the risk of pathogen contamination of the environment when pathogens are occasionally present on people's hands. Significance and impact of the study: The study suggests that the risk of cross contamination from the washroom users to the environment and subsequent users should be considered when choosing a hand-drying method. The data could potentially give guidance following the selection of drying methods on implementing measures to minimise the risk of cross contamination.
    Journal of Applied Microbiology 05/2013; 115(2). DOI:10.1111/jam.12248 · 2.48 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: National evidence-based guidelines for preventing healthcare-associated infections (HCAI) in National Health Service (NHS) hospitals in England were originally commissioned by the Department of Health and developed during 1998–2000 by a nurse-led multi-professional team of researchers and specialist clinicians. Following extensive consultation, they were first published in January 20011 and updated in 2007.2 A cardinal feature of evidence-based guidelines is that they are subject to timely review in order that new research evidence and technological advances can be identified, appraised and, if shown to be effective for the prevention of HCAI, incorporated into amended guidelines. Periodically updating the evidence base and guideline recommendations is essential in order to maintain their validity and authority. The Department of Health commissioned a review of new evidence and we have updated the evidence base for making infection prevention and control recommendations. A critical assessment of the updated evidence indicated that the epic2 guidelines published in 2007 remain robust, relevant and appropriate, but some guideline recommendations required adjustments to enhance clarity and a number of new recommendations were required. These have been clearly identified in the text. In addition, the synopses of evidence underpinning the guideline recommendations have been updated. These guidelines (epic3) provide comprehensive recommendations for preventing HCAI in hospital and other acute care settings based on the best currently available evidence. National evidence-based guidelines are broad principles of best practice that need to be integrated into local practice guidelines and audited to reduce variation in practice and maintain patient safety. Clinically effective infection prevention and control practice is an essential feature of patient protection. By incorporating these guidelines into routine daily clinical practice, patient safety can be enhanced and the risk of patients acquiring an infection during episodes of health care in NHS hospitals in England can be minimised.
    Journal of Hospital Infection 01/2014; 86:S1–S70. DOI:10.1016/S0195-6701(13)60012-2 · 2.54 Impact Factor
Show more