A Randomized Trial of the Efficacy of Hand Disinfection for Prevention of Rhinovirus Infection

• Published in: Clinical infectious diseases Vol. 54; no. 10; pp. 1422 - 1426
• Main Authors: Turner, Ronald B., Fuls, Janice L., Rodgers, Nancy D., Goldfarb, Heidi B., Lockhart, Leslie K., Aust, Louise B.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Oxford Oxford University Press 15.05.2012
• Subjects: ARTICLES AND COMMENTARIES; Biological and medical sciences; Citric Acid - administration & dosage; Clinical trials; Colds; Common cold; Control groups; Disease prevention; Diseases; Disinfectants - administration & dosage; Disinfection; Epidemiology. Vaccinations; Ethanol - administration & dosage; Female; General aspects; Hand Disinfection - methods; Hands; Human Experimentation; Humans; Hygiene; Infection Control - methods; Infections; Infectious diseases; Malates - administration & dosage; Male; Medical sciences; Pediatrics; Picornaviridae Infections - prevention & control; Picornaviridae Infections - virology; Rhinovirus; Rhinovirus - isolation & purification; Therapeutic irrigation; Viral infections; Viruses; Young Adult; Virus; Infection; Prevention; Picornaviridae; Disinfection; Hand; Rhinovirus
• ISSN: 1058-4838; 1537-6591; 1537-6591
• DOI: 10.1093/cid/cis201

Background. Hand disinfection is frequently recommended for prevention of rhinovirus (RV) infection and RV-associated common colds. The effectiveness of this intervention has not been established in a natural setting. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of hand disinfection on RV infection and RV-associated common cold illness in a natural setting. Methods. A controlled clinical trial was done in young adult volunteers during 9 weeks of the fall 2009 RV season. Volunteers were randomized to either an antiviral hand treatment containing 2% citric acid and 2% malic acid in 62% ethanol (n = 116) or to a no-treatment control group (n = 96). The hand treatment was applied every 3 hours while the subjects were awake. All volunteers kept a daily diary of symptoms and had a nasal lavage for polymerase chain reaction once each week and 2 additional lavages around the time of each common cold illness. The primary endpoint was the number of RV-associated illnesses. The incidence of RV infection and of common cold illnesses were evaluated as secondary endpoints. Results. The hand treatment did not significantly reduce RV infection or RV-related common cold illnesses. The total number of common cold illnesses was significantly reduced in the intent-to-treat analysis, but this effect was not seen in the per protocol analysis. Conclusions. In this study, hand disinfection did not reduce RV infection or RV-related common cold illnesses. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT00993759.