Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b6zl4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-24T23:35:39.319Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Not Perfect-Just Among the Best Available: Reply

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Mark E. Rupp
Mark E. Rupp*
Affiliation:
Department of Internal Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska
*
984031 Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE 68198-4031 (merupp@unmc.edu)
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. As you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Letters to the Editor
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 29 , Issue 6 , June 2008 , pp. 580 - 582
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 2008

References

1.Rupp, M, Fitzgerald, T, Puumala, S, et al. Prospective, controlled, crossover trial of alcohol-based hand gel in critical care units. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2008;29:8–15.Google Scholar
2.Maiwald, M. Alcohol-based hand hygiene and nosocomial infection rates. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2008;29:579–580.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Mermel, LA, Boyce, JM, Voss, A, Allegranzi, B, Pittet, D. Trial of alcohol-based hand gel in critical care units. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2008;29:577–579.Google Scholar
4.Widmer, AF, Rotter, M. Effectiveness of alcohol-based hand hygiene gels in reducing nosocomial infection rates. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2008;29:576.Google Scholar
5.McGuckin, M, Waterman, R. “Cannot detect a change” is not the same as “there is not a change.” Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2008;29:576–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Study demonstrates sustained infection prevention takes a comprehensive strategy. Available at: http://www.shea-online.org/Assets/files/SHEA_News_-_February_2008.pdf. Accessed May 9, 2008.Google Scholar
7.Leading expert disputes interpretation of hand hygiene survey at University of Nebraska Medical Center. Available at: http.//www.shea-online.org/Assets/files/handgelreleaseFinal.pdf. Accessed May 9, 2008.Google Scholar
8.Sebille, V, Chevret, S, Valleron, AJ. Modeling the spread of resistant nosocomial pathogens in an intensive care unit. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1997;18:84–92.Google Scholar
9.Silvestri, L, Petros, AJ, Sarginson, RE, de la Cal, MA, Murray, AE, van Saene, HKF. Handwashing in the intensive care unit: a big measure with modest effect. J Hosp Infect 2005;59:172–179.Google Scholar
10.Eckmanns, T, Schwab, F, Bessert, J, et al. Hand rub consumption and hand hygiene compliance are not indicators of pathogen transmission in intensive care units. J Hosp Infect 2006;63:406–411.Google Scholar
11.Ali, Y, Dolan, MJ, Fendler, EJ, Larson, EL. Alcohols. In: Block, SS, ed. Disinfection, Sterilization, and Preservation. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2001:229–253.Google Scholar
12.World Health Organization. WHO guidelines on hand hygiene in health care (advanced draft). Geneva: World Health Organization, 2006. Available at: http//www.who.int/patientsafety/information_centre.Google Scholar
13.Test Report B 10988ae, Purell Hygienic Hand Rub Gel, EN 1500-Hygienic Handrub, May 19, 2006, HygCen International, Bischofshofen, Austria. Copies available from Gojo Industries.Google Scholar
14.International Code Council. Chapter 34. Flammable and Combustible Liquids. In: 2006 International Fire Code. Falls Church, VA: International Code Council; 2006:305–343.Google Scholar
15.Traore, O, Hugonnet, S, Lubbe, J, Griffiths, W, Pittet, D. Liquid versus gel formulation: a prospective intervention study. Critical Care 2007;11:R52.Google Scholar