THE EFFICACY OF ASEPTIC COMPARED TO DAILY METHOD

The Effectiveness of Hand Drying within Health Care Field Compared to

Everyday Paper Towel Use
Zoe Windfelder
Florida Gulf Coast University

THE EFFICACY OF ASEPTIC COMPARED TO DAILY METHOD

Abstract
The purpose of this experiment was to determine the most effective way in preventing
immediate pathogenic microbial growth through two different methods of drying. The two
procedures that were used to dry hands included the aseptic clinical technique and the everyday
drying method. The aseptic clinical technique provides a thorough drying from the fingertips to
wrist, distal phalanges to the proximal carpus. A new paper towel was used for each section of
the hand independently, four in total. The everyday method used four paper towels in a rubbing
motion. Testing for microbes included both left and right hand before and after washing with
both drying techniques. Microbial counts were presented on sheeps blood-enriched agar plates
and incubated at average body temperature (37 Celsius). This temperature was to hinder
microbial growth and permit visible results. The results showed that the aseptic technique
produced a depletion of bacteria, but the daily method had an increase in microbial growth. This
concludes that the aseptic technique is a more effective way of drying your hands while reducing
the risk of pathogenic organisms.

THE EFFICACY OF ASEPTIC COMPARED TO DAILY METHOD

Introduction
Hand drying is a phenomenon that has not been the concern of society until most
recently. Originally Ignaz Semmelweis set forth the importance of hand washing in 1847. Due to
a high mortality rate and contaminated hands, he constituted that hand hygiene can affect the
health of not only yourself but others as well. As research developed so did regulations on how to
properly wash your hands. In 2002, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
released Guidelines for Hand Hygiene in Health-Care settings. Investigations of different scrubs
and lengths of time were established but not a particular way in how to dry your hands. Not until
recently has hand drying become a key factor in how the microorganisms of the hands are
spread. The importance of such a minute feature can be simplified to the fact that if hands are
still damp then they are more susceptible to microorganisms, which could end up being
pathogenic. Efficient hand drying is important for reducing transfer of commensal and
remaining contaminants to surfaces (Snelling, 2010). Multiple ways of drying are constantly
being assessed which include the jet air dryers, paper towels, and even cloth towels. Numerous
experiments have been done and one in particular concluded that drying with jet air dryers
resulted with 59.5 colonies of yeast in comparison to the 2.2 colonies that people acquired from
paper towel use (Webb, 2015). Although air dryers would consume less paper towels and thus
less waste, in the long run, environmentalists stand by this method. Medical professionals and
everyday people disagree and require a faster yet preventative microbial growth method to dry
hands with the use of paper towels.
Broad research has been completed with all of the previously noted ways of hand drying
to be a variable. An individuals hand hygiene can result in nearly triple the amount of
transferrable bacteria than that of a hospitals protocol for hand care (Merry, 2001).

THE EFFICACY OF ASEPTIC COMPARED TO DAILY METHOD

Consequently, there are specific and also precautionary hand drying techniques that health
professionals use in order to put their patients in the safest hands possible. In several nursing
textbooks, there includes a guide or a set of instructions on how to care for your hands before
and after caring for a patient. These set of guidelines have physicians scrub their hands a specific
way but most importantly pat their hands dry from fingertips to wrist, using one paper towel at a
time (Sorrentino, 2000, p. 225). Thus, patting safeguards the cleanliness of hands but other
vigorous ways of drying hands may spread bacteria to other areas of their hands, wrists, and
arms.
Not only does hand drying majorly affect us in the health care setting but in other aspects
of society to include schools, airports, and even the food industry. The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) has compared hand hygiene to the health care industry directly. In order to
properly serve uncontaminated food, the establishments need to have a code similar to that of a
hospital. Hand washing and drying has not been limited to hands but also including the arms,
similar to that of an aseptic surgical technique. Though hand washing and drying is beginning to
show similar patterns between health care and food industry, there are different fears as to what
may arise if hygiene is not completed properly. Although the concerns of pathogens may be
different, hospital settings fear nosocomial bacterial pathogens also known as Hospital-Acquired
Infection (HAI) and lipophilic viruses, while food industry is concerned with fecal-oral
commissions (FDA, 2016), both issues arise from such a simple cause of washing and drying
hands. In direct comparison to the health institutions, the food industry may reduce such major
disputes if using the fingertip to wrist technique of drying hands.
Taking into consideration the above evidence, the hypothesis for this experiment is that
the aseptic hand drying technique would be more beneficial than the everyday method of hand

THE EFFICACY OF ASEPTIC COMPARED TO DAILY METHOD

drying. The every day method would supply the hands with more microbes and cause abrasion,
thus erasing the previous activity of washing hands.
Materials and Methods
The materials essential for this experiment included six sheeps blood-enriched agar petri
plates, Up & Up Antibacterial Hand Soap with Moisturizers, at least 24 paper towels, a sharpie
marker, three experimenters with two hands each, six rubber gloves, sink with warm running
water, and a clock. To start, the experimenters decided which hand would use the variable of
aseptic drying technique and which would use the variable of daily method. The experimenters
decided to use the right hand for aseptic drying technique, and the left hand for the daily method.
Next, all three experimenters labeled the agar plates with initials, date, and which hand was used
with each plate. The last step of set-up had the experimenters draw a line down the middle on
the outside of the plate with one side labeled B for before and the other A for after.
Following primary set-up, the first experimenter took the petri dish labeled for the left
hand, opened with their right hand, and dragged their left hands corresponding pointer and
middle finger on the agar from top to bottom of dish on the B side. Both the second and third
experimenter completed the same actions for their corresponding petri dishes. Consequently, the
experimenters did the same steps with their right hand immediately following the left hand
procedure. All petri dishes had the lids put back on immediately following the wiping of the
pointer and middle finger. Experimenter one turned on the hot faucet for a warm base
temperature. All three experimenters then rinsed their left hands with water and applied a single
pump of the antibacterial soap into the palm of the ungloved left hand. They washed their hands
vigorously to the pace of the Happy Birthday song twice, which ranged from 25-30 seconds.
Once time was up, the hands were rinsed of the soap and the water was left running at the same

THE EFFICACY OF ASEPTIC COMPARED TO DAILY METHOD

temperature. The experimenters took the approximate four paper towels from the dispenser and
dried them in a rubbing motion that is considered a daily method of drying. Next they went to
the left hand petri dishes, opened them using the gloved right hand, and dragged their left pointer
and middle finger on the agar from top to bottom of the dish on the A side. Consequently, the
experimenters closed the petri dishes with the analogous lids to prevent any contamination that
may reside within the lab.
Subsequently, the experimenters disposed of the gloves for the right hand and put a new
glove on the left hand. Using the gloved left hand, experimenters laid out twelve paper towels,
on the lab bench top, four for each experimenter so it would be easier to grab them one at a time.
Then, all three went back to the sink and washed their hands as previously described, vigorously
to the pace of the Happy Birthday song twice, for about 25-30 seconds. Afterwards, hands
were rinsed of the soap. Each experimenter grabbed one paper towel at a time and used the
aseptic technique. They grabbed a single paper towel, held at the fingertips, phalanges, until it
seemed completely dry, and disposed of the towel. Next, a new paper towel was held at the upper
palm of their hands, metacarpals, until dry and the paper towel was disposed of. A third paper
towel was used in the lower palm region, carpals, of the hand and then disposed. Finally, the
fourth paper towel was used on the area of the wrist, near distal radius and ulna, and thrown in
trash. This method had all three experimenters pat the hands dry from fingertips to wrist. Four
paper towels were used for each experimenter, equivalent to the daily method. Lastly they went
to the right hand petri dishes, opened using the gloved left hand, and dragged their right pointer
and middle finger on the agar from the top to the bottom of the dish on the A side. Again, the
experimenters closed the petri dishes with the analogous lids to prevent any contamination that
may reside within the lab.

THE EFFICACY OF ASEPTIC COMPARED TO DAILY METHOD

Once the experimenters successfully completed all the steps, the petri dishes were placed
in the corresponding incubation racks to be incubated at 37 degrees Celsius, body temperature,
for 5 days. This allotted time allowed for enough growth that may be visible to the naked eye for
inspection. Once the 5 days passed, experimenters inspected the dishes. They counted and
compared possible factors that affected the growth on the dishes as well as what special
microorganisms could have made such an impact on the dishes. The experiment took place at
Florida Gulf Coast University in Whitaker Halls laboratory, room 268, on September 15th, 2016.
The results were evaluated at the same location on September 20th, 2016.
Results
Figure 1: Below illustrates experimenter ones left hand after washing and using the daily
method of drying.

The plate shows one hundred and twenty-seven colonies from the fingers before washing and
using the daily method of drying. Only nine colonies were visible after this method. All
considered to be resident flora.
Figure 2: Below illustrates experimenter twos left hand after washing and using the daily
method of drying.

THE EFFICACY OF ASEPTIC COMPARED TO DAILY METHOD

The plate shows fourteen colonies residing on the plate prior to the wash and daily method of
drying. One of those fourteen colonies is Neisseria, egg-shaped microorganism, but the others
are resident flora. After the daily method it seems as if a fungus is taking control over twenty-two
small colonies of resident flora and one Bacillus.
Figure 3: Below illustrates experimenter threes left hand after washing and using the
daily method of drying.

THE EFFICACY OF ASEPTIC COMPARED TO DAILY METHOD

The plate displays thirty-seven colonies prior to wash and daily method of drying. Of those
thirty-seven colonies, fourteen of them had a yellow color to them. They are depicted as
Micrococcus. After using the daily method of drying, fifty-nine colonies of resident flora are
present but one small Micrococcus colony resided in the cluster on the bottom right.
Figure 4: Below illustrates experimenter ones right hand after washing and using the
aseptic technique of drying.

The plate displays forty-five colonies prior to washing and using the aseptic technique of drying
with the right hand. Of those forty-five colonies, there is one Bacillus in the middle dividing line
between the before and after. Three out of the forty-five are Micrococcus, but the remaining
forty-two are white, resident flora. After using the aseptic technique, sixteen colonies resided on
the opposite side of the plate. All sixteen colonies are resident flora.
Figure 5: Below illustrates experimenter twos right hand after washing and using the
aseptic technique of drying.

THE EFFICACY OF ASEPTIC COMPARED TO DAILY METHOD

10

The plate consists of Proteus spanning almost the entire plate. It seems as though it branched out
from the lower left region of before, prior to using the aseptic technique for the right hand.
After using this technique, a single colony of resident flora resides on the outer rim of the agar.
Figure 6: Below illustrates experimenter threes right hand after washing and using the
aseptic technique of drying.

The plate shows thirty-five colonies before washing and using the aseptic technique of drying.
Nine of the thirty-five colonies are Micrococcus, and five of those nine are Neisseria, eggshaped. Two colonies reside after using this aseptic technique. There is one resident flora and
the other, with the film-like structure around it, is transient flora.

THE EFFICACY OF ASEPTIC COMPARED TO DAILY METHOD

11

Figure 7: The bar graph below shows how many colonies were presented on the
experimenters blood-agar plates after inoculation and incubation. The counts were done for right
hands that completed the before and after aseptic drying technique and also the before and after
for the left hands that used the daily method of drying.

Existing Colonies

Experimenters 1-3

Experimenter 3

Number of colonies before

washing and daily drying

Experimenter 2

Number of colonies after

washing and daily drying

Experimenter 1

Number of colonies before

washing and aseptic drying
0 50 100150

Number of colonies after

washing and aseptic drying

# of Colonies Present

Figure 8: This chart depicts how many diverse colonies exist on each of the
experimenters blood-agar plates after inoculation and incubation. The counts were done for right
hands that completed the before and after aseptic drying technique and also the before and after
for the left hands that used the daily method of drying.

12

THE EFFICACY OF ASEPTIC COMPARED TO DAILY METHOD

Experimenters

Experimenter 1
Experimenter 2
Experimenter 3

Number of

Number of

Number of

Number of

diverse

diverse

diverse

diverse colonies

colonies on the

colonies on the

colonies on the

on the right

left hand

left hand after

right hand

hand after

before washing washing and

before washing washing and

and using the

using the daily

and using the

using the aseptic

daily method

method of

aseptic

technique of

of drying

drying

technique of

drying

1
2
2

1
2
2

drying
3
1
3

1
1
2

Discussion
After examination of the gathered data, it is believed that the aseptic technique of drying
did reduce the overall amount of resident flora microbes. The hypothesis was that aseptic hand
drying technique would be more beneficial than the everyday method, which supplies more
microbes due to abrasion. There was a significant decrease in the diversity and overall amount
of microbes, especially resident flora, when using the aseptic technique (Figure 7, 8). Although
all the experimenters right hands had a depletion of bacteria, the experimenters left hand plates
increased in microbial growth after they had washed and dried their hands using the daily
method. The resistance between your hands while rubbing them together with a paper towel can
counteract the reduction in bacterial numbers accrued during hand washing (Snelling, 2010).
In the health care field, workers rely on safe and clean hands when caring for patients. An
individuals hand hygiene can result in nearly triple the amount of transferrable bacteria than that

THE EFFICACY OF ASEPTIC COMPARED TO DAILY METHOD

13

of a hospitals protocol for hand care (Merry, 2001). Therefore, if an aseptic technique were used
more often in every day routine care there would be less exchangeable microorganisms.
After completion and inspection of the experiment, there could be some arguments that
certain procedural errors skewed the data. Once each experimenter rinsed their hands of soap,
they reached toward their designated section of four paper towels. They were laid out on the lab
bench counter, for the aseptic technique, and could have picked up several contaminants before
being used by the experimenters. It is possible that various organisms such as the Proteus, found
on experimenter twos right hand after washing and drying, or even the fungus found on
experimenter twos left hand after washing and drying could have resulted from this. Also the
length at which the blood-agar plates were kept open, to wipe the fingers, varied. Impurities in
the air or from other students walking by may have caused the rare growth of organisms.
Additionally, more testing with precise steps could be used in order to prove further as to why
the aseptic technique is seen as far more superior to the everyday method.
Overall, the experiment provided some interesting insight as to why health care workers
have such a specific technique in washing and drying their hands. Hopefully others will realize
that not only is hand washing a very important factor in everyday life but also how you dry them
is just as significant. Perhaps education on this experiment will decrease or prevent the spread of
pathogens and increase the knowledge of appropriate hand hygiene.

Literature Cited

THE EFFICACY OF ASEPTIC COMPARED TO DAILY METHOD

14

Boyce, J. M., & Pittet, D. (2002). Guideline for Hand Hygiene in HealthCare Settings:
Recommendations of the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee
and the HICPAC/SHEA/APIC/IDSA Hand Hygiene Task Force . Infection Control and
Hospital Epidemiology, 23(S12). doi:10.1086/503164
Caballero, C. A. (2012). Nursing OSCEs: A complete guide to exam success. Oxford:

Oxford

University Press.
FDA Fact Sheet on Hand Hygiene in Retail & Food Service Establishments. (2014,
November 26). Retrieved October 10, 2016, from
http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/RetailFoodProtection/Industryand
RegulatoryAssistanceandTrainingResources/ucm135577.htm
Lakkis, C., Lian, K., Napper, G., & Kiely, P. M. (2007). Infection control guidelines for
optometrists 2007. Clin Exp Optometry Clinical and Experimental Optometry,

90(6),

434-444. doi:10.1111/j.1444-0938.2007.00192.x
Merry, A. F. (2001). Touch contamination levels during anaesthetic procedures and their
relationship to hand hygiene procedures: A clinical audit. British Journal of
Anaesthesia, 87(2), 291-294. doi:10.1093/bja/87.2.291
Rebeiro, G. (2012). Fundamentals of nursing: Clinical skills workbook. Chatswood,
N.S.W.: Mosby.
Snelling, A., Saville, T., Stevens, D., & Beggs, C. (2010). Comparative evaluation of the
hygienic efficacy of an ultra-rapid hand dryer vs conventional warm air hand
Journal of Applied Microbiology, 110(1), 19-26. doi:10.1111/j.13652672.2010.04838.x
Sorrentino, S. A. (2000). Mosby's textbook for nursing assistants. St. Louis: Mosby.

dryers.

THE EFFICACY OF ASEPTIC COMPARED TO DAILY METHOD

Webb, S. (2015, April 08). What is the most hygienic way to dry your hands after using

15
the

toilet? Scientists claim to have definitive answer - Mirror Online. Retrieved

October 09, 2016, from http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/technology- science/science/whatmost-hygienic-way-dry-5479205