The relative influences of product volume, delivery format and alcohol concentration on dry-time and efficacy of alcohol-based hand rubs

Table 4 Efficacy of three ABHRs evaluated according to procedures of EN 1500

Test ABHR	Efficacy at 3-mL application volume				Efficacy at volume drying in 30 s
Test ABHR	Application volume	mean log RF ± SD	P-value^a	CI^b	Application volume	mean log RF ± SD	P-value^a	CI^b
EN 1500 reference	2 × 3 mL^c	4.63 ± 0.60			2 × 3 mL	4.83 ± 0.79
Foam B	3 mL	4.56 ± 0.68	0.9299	(-0.23, 0.37)	1.6 mL^d	3.81 ± 0.61	<0.00005	(0.65, 1.38)
Rinse E	3 mL	4.50 ± 0.90	0.6793	(-0.17, 0.43)	2.0 mL	4.03 ± 0.55	<0.00005	(0.44 1.18)
Gel F	3 mL	4.61 ± 0.94	0.9979	(-0.28, 0.32)	2.1 mL	4.02 ± 0.60	<0.00005	(0.44, 1.17)

^aComparison of each product with the reference.
^b95% two-sided CIs on the mean log₁₀ RF for each product subtracted from the mean log₁₀ RF for the reference. By EN 1500, if the upper confidence limit difference is less than 0.6, then non-inferiority between the test and reference products is established.
^cReference product rubbed for a total of 60 s, followed by a 5-s rinse under running tap water.
^dThe volume calculated to dry in 30 s was 1.7 mL. This volume could not be achieved with available pump devices, so a lower (conservative) volume was used.

ISSN: 1471-2334