PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

H A Lilly

Publications and source records attributed to H A Lilly.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
PubMed1978

Prophylaxis against tetanus in non-immune patients with wounds: the role of antibiotics and of human antitetanus globulin.

The potential value of oral erythromycin for antitetanus prophylaxis in non-immune patients with open wounds was assessed. Serum obtained by venepuncture from health persons 2 h after an oral dose of an erythromycin preparation was used as a culture medium rendered anaerobic by addition of cooked meat. Strains of Clostridium tetani inoculated into these sera failed to multiply when the donor had taken 500 mg of erythromycin estolate before a meal; other erythromycin preparations and the estolate at a dosage of 250 mg were ineffective or inconsistent in their inhibition of the growth of Cl. tetani. Human antitetanus globulin (ATG) was given to 12 patients, 9 with severe injuries and 3 with extensive burns, all of whom were judged, from their history, to be non-immune (or with expired immunity); all except one had received large intravenous infusions of blood and/or other fluids. Serum antitoxin assays by a mouse protection technique on days 0, 1--2, 3--5, 6--10 and 14+ showed no detectable antitoxin (less than 0.01) unit/ml) in the initial (pre-ATG) sample from three patients with severe injuries and in one with extensive burns. All the patients in the severely injured group showed an early appearance or increase in tetanus antitoxin to protective titres. Two of the three severely burned patients showed, respectively, a delayed appearance or an increase in antitoxin; the other burned patients showed a reduction from the initial pre-ATG titre, followed by a return to that titre after day 5.

Blood Transfusion↗
PubMed1978

Transient skin flora: their removal by cleansing or disinfection in relation to their mode of deposition.

A suspension of Staphylococcus aureus deposited on the skin was much more effectively removed by soap-and-water washing when it had been spread and allowed to dry (mean survival 2%) than when it had been rubbed on to the skin (mean survival 29.9%); when antiseptics (70% ethyl alcohol, Hibiscrub without added water) were used, there was no difference between their action against bacteria dried on and bacteria rubbed on to the skin; both of these methods, and especially alcohol, were more effective than soap and water. When a detergent-disinfectant method (washing with Hibiscrub and water) was used, there was a significantly greater effect against rubbed-on than against dried-on bacteria; soap and water was slightly more effective than Hibiscrub and water against the latter. The need to reappraise methods of reducing transient skin flora in 'hygienic' hand cleansing and the tests used for this purpose are discussed.

Bacteriological Techniques↗
PubMed1977

"Methicillin-resistant" Staphylococcus aureus: reassessment by controlled trial in burns unit.

A controlled trial of oral flucloxacillin (250 mg six-hourly for four days) was performed in 34 patients treated by the covered method whose burns had yielded a heavy or moderate growth of Staphylococcus aureus resistant to methicillin at 30 degrees C but moderately sensitive at 37 degrees C. Staph aureus was eliminated in nine of the 17 patients treated with flucloxacillin but in none of the 17 controls; the proportion of patients from whose burns sensitive Staph aureus was eliminated in an earlier trial of cloxacillin was greater than this. Strains of Staph aureus commonly described as methicillin-resistant and showing heterogeneous growth at 37 degrees C of many sensitive and very few resistant bacterial cells should, in the light of these findings, be called moderately sensitive to flucloxacillin. Such "heteroresistant" strains showed consistent moderate sensitivity in replicate diffusion sensitivity tests at 37 degrees C, but very inconsistent results in replicate dilution tests, especially with flucloxacillin. These studies showed that 18-hour diffusion sensitivity tests indicate the clinical value of treatment with flucloxacillin for staphylococcal infections of moderate severity more correctly at 37 degrees C than at 30 degrees C.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1975

Gloved hand as applicator of antiseptic to operation sites.

A 95% ethanol solution containing 0-5% chlorhexidine digluconate caused a significantly greater mean reduction in skin bacteria (99-9% plus or minus 0-024) when rubbed by a gloved hand on to the skin of one hand for two minutes than when applied to the same area for the same time with the traditional gauze applicator for operation sites (90-7% plus or minus 2-12). The latter reduction, however, was greater than that reported in five previous experiments in which application of the same solution for the same time to two hands gave mean reductions varying from 79% to 84%. An aqueous solution and a 70% alcoholic solution of chlorhexidine also gave significantly greater reduction (and alcoholic povidone iodine almost significantly greater reduction) when applied by a gloved hand than on gauze. It is inferred that the effectiveness of skin disinfection depends both on the antiseptic used and on the manner of application, and varies with the amount of friction used in applying the antiseptic. Further studies on disinfection of the surgeon's hands with 0-5% chlorhexidine in 95% alcohol rubbed on and allowed to dry have supported its value and acceptability; the mean bacterial counts of washings from gloves of surgeons after operations were lower after the use of this method than after other preoperative preparations of the hands.

Bacteria↗
PubMed1975

Comparison of two methods for assessing the removal of total organisms and pathogens from the skin.

A standard hand-wash sampling technique was compared with a simple finger-streak sampling method in assessing the relative effectiveness of a number of alternative preparations used for disinfecting the surgeon's hands (alcoholic 0.5% chlorhexidine, alcoholic 0.1% tetrabrom-o-methyl phenol, a 4% chlorhexidine detergent solution, aqueous 0.5% chlorhexidine, 2% 'Irgasan' detergent solution and, as control, bar soap). There was a fairly good correlation between the results of assessment by the two methods after a single disinfection and after six disinfections, three on one day and three on the next. Significant differences were shown in 21 comparisons between treatments when the hand-wash sampling test was used, and 16 of these comparisons also showed a significant difference by the finger-streak test. Staphylococcus aureus was found in hand samplings from 5 out of 8 nurses in the Burns Unit of Birmingham Accident Hospital by the hand-wash sampling method and from 2 of the same 8 nurses by the finger-streak method; the numbers were small, and no Staph. aureus were isolated from the same hands after 1 min. wash in 70% ethyl alcohol. Similar sampling on 29 nurses in other wards showed Staph. aureus on 3 nurses (one in large numbers) by the hand-wash technique and on 1 nurse by the finger-streak test; in only 1 nurse whose hands showed Staph. aureus before disinfection was the organism found, by hand-wash sampling, after disinfection. Parallel sampling of nurses' hands after washing with soap and water and after disinfection with 95% ethanol showed larger numbers of Staph. aureus in a hospital for skin diseases than in a general hospital, and a lower incidence and somewhat lower density of Staph. aureus after ethanol treatment than after washing with soap and water; Gram-negative bacilli, on the other hand, were commoner on hands in the general than in the skin hospital, and present in much smaller numbers after disinfection with ethanol than after washing with soap and water. Antibiotic sensitivity tests showed the frequent recurrence on the hands of some nurses of multi-resistant Staph. aureus with resistance patterns similar to those found in infective lesions in some of the patients; different sensitivity patterns were usually found in staphylococci isolated from the nose. Even in wards where many patients were infected, carriage by nurses' hands of a particular strain of Staph. aureus did not seem to last for more than a few days.

Anti-Bacterial Agents↗
PubMed1974

Preoperative disinfection of surgeons' hands: use of alcoholic solutions and effects of gloves on skin flora.

A single application of about 10 ml of 95% alcoholic chlorhexidine (0.5%) or tetrabrom-o-methyl phenol (0.1%) rubbed on to the hands until they were dry led to mean reduction in viable bacterial counts from standard handwashings of 97.9 +/- 1.09% and 91.8 +/- 4.63% respectively. After six of such treatments, three on each of two successive days, the mean reductions in relation to viable counts before the first treatment were 99.7 +/- 0.09% for alcoholic chlorhexidine and 99.5 +/- 0.17% for tetrabrom-o-methyl phenol. These reductions were greater than those obtained with 4% chlorhexidine detergent solution- 87.1 +/- 3.5% and 98.2 +/- 1.6%, and with 95% or 70% ethyl alcohol and with aqueous 0.5% chlorhexidine. Preoperative washing of the surgeon's hands with alcoholic chlorhexidine used without addition of water is more effective and less expensive than handwashing with antiseptic detergent preparations and running water.The viable counts of washings from hands treated with various antiseptics, including ethyl alcohol, were lower in relation to the pretreatment levels when gloves had been worn for three hours than when samples for counts were taken immediately after the antiseptic treatment. No such difference was found in samplings from hands washed with unmedicated soap.Tests for residual action of antiseptics on the skin showed a greater effect with alcoholic chlorhexidine than with tetrabrom-o-methyl phenol, though both showed greater residual activity than an Irgasan DP 300 detergent preparation. No residual action was shown after 70% ethyl alcohol.

Bacteria↗
PubMed1974

Disinfection of the skin with detergent preparations of Irgasan DP 300 and other antiseptics.

An evaluation of the relative effectiveness of 2% hexachlorophane and 0.75% Irgasan DP 300 bar soaps in disinfection of the hands showed that the former caused a significantly larger reduction in natural skin bacteria than the latter after one handwash and after six handwashings, three on each of two successive days. Repeated use of Irgasan DP 300 bar soap caused a significantly greater reduction in skin flora than repeated handwashings with unmedicated bar soap, but a single handwash gave no significant reduction in skin flora compared with a single use of the unmedicated soap.In a comparison of a 4% chlorhexidine detergent solution a 3% hexachlorophane detergent cream and a 2% Irgasan DP 300 detergent solution the 4% chlorhexidine detergent gave the largest mean reduction in skin bacteria after one handwash and after six handwashings and 2% Irgasan DP 300 a poor and erratic reduction after a single handwash. After six handwashings all three preparations gave large reductions in skin bacteria. The 2% Irgasan preparation showed some residual activity on the skin after handwashing though less than that with chlorhexidine and with hexachlorophane-chlorocresol detergent preparations.

Anti-Infective Agents, Local↗
PubMed1973

Use of 4 per cent chlorhexidine detergent solution (Hibiscrub) and other methods of skin disinfection.

In a comparison of three antiseptic detergent preparations for hand washing, Hibiscrub, a 4% chlorhexidine detergent solution, caused a significantly greater estimated immediate reduction of skin flora (86.7% +/- 3.0) than was obtained with Dermofax, a 0.75% chlorhexidine detergent solution (55.5% +/- 5.1), or with Disadine scrub, a povidone iodine detergent preparation (68% +/- 6.8). After six applications the mean estimated reductions of skin flora were 99.2% +/- 0.2 for Hibiscrub, 97.7% +/- 0.7 for povidone iodine, and 91.8% +/- 1.6 for Dermofax.After a series of hand washings with Hibiscrub, as with a hexachlorophane detergent preparation, a further large reduction of skin flora, shown by bacterial counts of hand sampling, was obtained by a second phase of disinfection consisting of two minutes' application on gauze swabs of 0.5% chlorhexidine digluconate in 70% ethanol; a further wash with Hibiscrub, in place of alcoholic chlorhexidine, for the second phase of disinfection caused an increase rather than a reduction in the yield of bacteria on skin sampling. Unlike this "two-phase" disinfection, the application for 30 minutes of compresses soaked in 10% aqueous povidone iodine or in 0.5% aqueous chlorhexidine digluconate did not cause a greater reduction in skin flora than that obtained by the conventional two minutes' application on gauze of 0.5% chlorhexidine in 70% ethanol.Chlorocresol (0.3%) liquid soap (the base used for Ster-Zac liquid hexachlorophane soap) caused a mean reduction of skin flora when used for hand washing of 29% after one application and 72% after six applications spread over two days. This formulation, though less active and more variable as a detergent skin antiseptic than chlorhexidine, hexachlorophane, or povidone iodine detergent preparations, is an inexpensive disinfectant soap which could be useful in catering establishments. Alcoholic cetrimide applied as for disinfection of an operation site caused a reduction of skin flora greater than that shown by aqueous cetrimide but comparable to that shown by 70% ethyl alcohol in previous experiments.

Analysis of Variance↗
PubMed1971

Disinfection of the skin: an assessment of some new preparations.

Repeated hand washing with a detergent solution containing 0.75% chlorhexidine digluconate was found to cause a large reduction in the resident skin flora which was slightly though significantly smaller than that caused by the use of 3% hexachlorophane liquid soap containing a phenolic preservative, chlorocresol 0.3%. Both agents caused a greater immediate reduction of bacteria after a single hand washing than the hexachlorophane liquid soap without a phenolic additive had shown in earlier experiments; the soap base containing chlorocresol 0.3% but no hexachlorophane was also found to cause a large reduction in skin flora. The chlorhexidine detergent solution had no residual disinfectant action on the skin after rinsing and drying the hands.Disinfection of an operation site for two minutes with povidone-iodine containing 1% available iodine in 70% ethyl alcohol caused about as great a reduction in resident flora as a similar treatment with alcoholic 0.5% chlorhexidine. Both treatments were more effective than disinfection with aqueous 1% cetrimide or 0.1% benzalkonium chloride solutions.

Anti-Infective Agents, Local↗