Removal of Aerosolized Contaminants from Working Canines via a Field Wipe-Down Procedure

Evidence-based canine decontamination protocols are underrepresented in the veterinary literature. Aerosolized microbiological and chemical contaminants can pose a risk in deployment environments highlighting the need for improved canine field decontamination strategies. Prior work has established the efficacy of traditional, water-intensive methods on contaminant removal from the coat of the working canine; however, it is not known if similar reductions can be achieved with simple field expedient methods when resources are limited. The objective of this study was to measure the reduction of aerosolized contamination via a practical “wipe-down” procedure performed on working canine coats contaminated with a fluorescent, non-toxic, water-based aerosol. Disposable, lint-free towels were saturated with one of three treatments: water, 2% chlorhexidine gluconate scrub (CHX), or 7.5% povidone-iodine scrub (PVD). Both CHX and PVD were diluted at a 1:4 ratio. Treatments were randomly assigned to one of three quadrants established across the shoulders and back of commonly utilized working dog breeds (Labrador retrievers, n = 16; German shepherds, n = 16). The fourth quadrant remained unwiped, thus serving as a control. Reduction in fluorescent marker contamination was measured and compared across all quadrants. PVD demonstrated greater marker reduction compared to CHX or water in both breeds (p < 0.0001). Reduction was similar between CHX or water in Labradors (p = 0.86) and shepherds (p = 0.06). Effective wipe-down strategies using common veterinary cleansers should be further investigated and incorporated into decontamination practices to safeguard working canine health and prevent cross-contamination of human personnel working with these animals.

Download Full-text

Removal of Aerosolized Contaminants from Working Canines Via a Field Wipe-Down Procedure

10.20944/preprints202011.0229.v1 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Erin Perry ◽

Dakota Discepolo ◽

Eileen Jenkins ◽

Stephen Y. Liang

Keyword(s):

Povidone Iodine ◽

Chlorhexidine Gluconate ◽

Evidence Based ◽

Contaminant Removal ◽

Cross Contamination ◽

Fourth Quadrant ◽

Prior Work ◽

Chemical Contaminants ◽

Fluorescent Marker ◽

Labrador Retrievers

Evidence-based canine decontamination protocols are underrepresented in the veterinary literature. Aerosolized microbiological and chemical contaminants can pose a risk in deployment environments highlighting the need for improved canine field decontamination strategies. Prior work has established the efficacy of traditional, water-intensive methods on contaminant removal from the coat of the working canine; however, it is not known if similar reductions can be achieved with simple field expedient methods when resources are limited. The objective of this study was to measure the reduction of aerosolized contamination via a practical “wipe-down” procedure performed on working canine coats contaminated with a fluorescent, non-toxic, water-based aerosol. Disposable, lint-free towels were saturated with one of three treatments: water, 2% chlorhexidine gluconate scrub (CHX), or 7.5% povidone-iodine scrub (PVD). Both CHX and PVD were diluted at a 1:4 ratio. Treatments were randomly assigned to one of three quadrants established across the shoulders and back of commonly utilized working dog breeds (Labrador retrievers, n = 16; German shepherds, n = 16). The fourth quadrant remained unwiped, serving as a control. Reduction in fluorescent marker contamination was measured and compared across all quadrants. PVD demonstrated greater marker reduction compared to CHX or water in both breeds (P < 0.0001). Reduction was similar between CHX or water in Labradors (P = 0.86) and shepherds (P = 0.06). Effective wipe-down strategies using common veterinary cleansers should be further investigated and incorporated into decontamination practices to safeguard working canine health and prevent cross-contamination of human personnel working with these animals.

Download Full-text

Povidone-iodine preprocedural rinse—An evidence-based, second-line defense against severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in dental healthcare

Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology ◽

10.1017/ice.2021.90 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-2

Author(s):

Raj Kumar Maurya ◽

Harpreet Singh ◽

Pranav Kapoor ◽

Poonam Sharma ◽

Dhirendra Srivastava

Keyword(s):

Povidone Iodine ◽

Evidence Based ◽

Second Line ◽

Respiratory Coronavirus

Download Full-text

Can povidone iodine gargle/mouthrinse inactivate SARS-CoV-2 and decrease the risk of nosocomial and community transmission during the COVID-19 pandemic? An evidence-based update

Japanese Dental Science Review ◽

10.1016/j.jdsr.2021.03.001 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 57 ◽

pp. 39-45

Author(s):

Aditi Chopra ◽

Karthik Sivaraman ◽

Raghu Radhakrishnan ◽

Dhanasekar Balakrishnan ◽

Aparna Narayana

Keyword(s):

Povidone Iodine ◽

Evidence Based ◽

Community Transmission

Download Full-text

Evaluation of a Waterless, Scrubless Chlorhexidine Gluconate/Ethanol Surgical Scrub and Povidone-Iodine for Antimicrobial Efficacy

Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing ◽

10.4040/jkan.2008.38.1.39 ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 38 (1) ◽

pp. 39 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Jeong Sil Choi

Keyword(s):

Povidone Iodine ◽

Chlorhexidine Gluconate ◽

Antimicrobial Efficacy

Download Full-text

Antisepsis of the skin before spinal surgery with povidone iodine-alcohol followed by chlorhexidine gluconate-alcoholversuspovidone iodine-alcohol applied twice for the prevention of contamination of the wound by bacteria

The Bone & Joint Journal ◽

10.1302/0301-620x.99b10.bjj-2017-0291.r1 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 99-B (10) ◽

pp. 1354-1365 ◽

Cited By ~ 9

Author(s):

S. Patrick ◽

A. McDowell ◽

A. Lee ◽

A. Frau ◽

U. Martin ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Spinal Surgery ◽

Povidone Iodine ◽

Chlorhexidine Gluconate

Download Full-text

Reduced Bacteria on Transplantable Allograft Skin after Preparation with Chlorhexidine Gluconate, Povidone-Iodine, and Isopropanol

Journal of Burn Care & Rehabilitation ◽

10.1097/00004630-199105000-00005 ◽

1991 ◽

Vol 12 (3) ◽

pp. 224-228 ◽

Cited By ~ 15

Author(s):

S R May ◽

D P Roberts ◽

F A DeClement ◽

J M Still

Keyword(s):

Povidone Iodine ◽

Chlorhexidine Gluconate

Download Full-text

10% povidone-iodine versus 2% chlorhexidine gluconate for Periurethral cleansing before catheterization among hospitalized patients: A randomized controlled trial

10.21203/rs.2.14793/v1 ◽

2019 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

elham vahabi ◽

somayeh ghafari ◽

somayeh haghighat

Keyword(s):

Randomized Controlled Trial ◽

Povidone Iodine ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Chlorhexidine Gluconate ◽

Hospitalized Patients ◽

Time Intervals ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Tract Infections ◽

Urine Specimens

Abstract Background There are evidences that periurethral cleaning by antiseptics before catheterization decreases the risk of urinary tract infections. The purpose of this study was to Comparing 10% povidone-iodine and chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) effectiveness in periurethral cleaning before catheterization on bacteriuria and pyuria in hospitalized patients. Methods A randomized controlled trial was used, and subjects were randomly allocated to either the 10% povidone -iodine group or the 2% chlorhexidine gluconate group. Urine specimens for culture and Analyse were collected 3 times for each subject within 5 days. Results Overall, 216 urine samples were collected in 72 subjects .There were no significant difference in results of bacteriuria of two groups immediately, 72 hrs. and 5 days after catheterization (p>0.05). There was no significant difference between two groups regarding positive pyuria immediately after sampling (p>0.05). Although its amount was significantly higher 72 hrs and 5days after catheterization in 10% povidone-iodine group than 2% chlorhexidine gluconate (p<0.05). In order to evaluate average of micro-organism in different time intervals between two groups Mann– Whitney test was used. This test showed that there was no significant difference of number of time intervals (p>0.05). Conclusions The results of this study showed that using 2% chlorhexidine gluconate reduced the amount of bacteriuria in catheterazied patients compared to 10% povidone-iodine. However this difference was not significant. Therefore doing more studies with more number of samples in this field is suggested. Trial registration: Retrospectively registered. IRCT20170712035044N2 Key words: 10% povidone-iodine- 2% chlorhexidine gluconate - Bacteriuria- Periurethral cleansing

Download Full-text

Learning at work: Toward a learning stance in teams

Adaptive Mentalization-Based Integrative Treatment ◽

10.1093/med-psych/9780198718673.003.0007 ◽

2017 ◽

pp. 263-298

Author(s):

Dickon Bevington ◽

Peter Fuggle ◽

Liz Cracknell ◽

Peter Fonagy

Keyword(s):

Evidence Based ◽

Fourth Quadrant ◽

Quality Improvements ◽

Technical Aspects ◽

Learning At Work ◽

Systematic Effort ◽

Health And Social Care ◽

Research Findings ◽

Treatment Manuals ◽

Over Time

Team learning, the focus of the fourth quadrant of the AMBIT wheel, is justified by strong evidence about the weak translation of evidence-based trainings into practice fidelity, and weak clinical outcomes from even the most powerfully evidenced practices. The need for strong leadership (and what this entails) to support development of a learning organization is described. Research findings on quality improvements and outcomes in health and social care settings lead to a framework of AMBIT competencies. The notion of local team “manualization” is introduced; this is the systematic effort of a team over time to reflect upon and record (mentalize) how the team works, and why. Discussion of treatment manuals and (as the AMBIT stance presents it) the tension between “Respect for evidence” and “Respect for local practice and expertise” lead to notions of co-construction. Technical aspects of AMBIT’s wiki manual are described, along with how these aspects support a community of practice and mirror “open-source” IT developments.

Download Full-text