Are Alcohol Sanitizers More Effective Than Soap at Killing Bacteria?

Have a question about science, health, fitness, or diet? Get cited, evidence-based insights: Consensus is an AI-Powered Academic Search Engine.

Try for free
Written by Consensus AI
6 min read

Check out this answer from Consensus:

Alcohol-based hand sanitizers are generally more effective than soap and water in rapidly reducing bacterial load on hands, especially in healthcare settings and situations where water is not readily available. However, the combination of soap and alcohol-based sanitizers offers the most comprehensive approach to hand hygiene. It is essential to consider the specific context and the type of microorganisms when choosing between these hand hygiene methods.

Hand hygiene is a critical component in preventing the spread of infectious diseases, particularly in healthcare settings and during pandemics. The debate over the efficacy of alcohol-based hand sanitizers versus traditional soap and water for bacterial reduction has garnered significant attention. This article aims to compare the effectiveness of alcohol sanitizers and soap in killing bacteria, drawing on findings from multiple research studies.

Efficacy of Alcohol-Based Hand Sanitizers

Alcohol-based hand sanitizers are widely used due to their convenience and rapid action. Studies have shown that these sanitizers are highly effective in reducing bacterial load on hands. For instance, a study comparing different formulations of alcohol-based hand sanitizers found that those with higher alcohol content and additional active ingredients were more effective in killing bacteria . Another study demonstrated that alcohol-based hand sanitizers could achieve significant bacterial reduction, particularly against gram-negative bacteria on lightly soiled hands.

Efficacy of Soap and Water

Handwashing with soap and water is a traditional method for hand hygiene. It is particularly effective in removing dirt, organic material, and a broad spectrum of microorganisms. Research indicates that while soap and water are effective, their efficacy can be influenced by the type of soap used. Antimicrobial soaps, for example, have been shown to be more effective than non-antimicrobial soaps in reducing bacterial load . However, the effectiveness of soap and water can be compromised in the absence of adequate water supply, as highlighted in a field study conducted in Tanzania.

Comparative Studies

Several studies have directly compared the efficacy of alcohol-based hand sanitizers and soap. One study found that alcohol-based hand sanitizers were more effective than soap and water in reducing bacterial contamination on hands, particularly in healthcare settings. Another study comparing the virucidal activity of alcohol-based sanitizers and antimicrobial soaps found that sanitizers were generally more effective in inactivating test viruses, although some soaps showed superior activity against specific viruses.

Combination of Soap and Sanitizers

Interestingly, the combination of soap and alcohol-based sanitizers has been shown to provide the greatest reduction in microbial load. A study evaluating different hand hygiene regimens found that using an alcohol gel sanitizer in combination with either an antimicrobial or plain lotion soap resulted in the highest mean log reductions from baseline.

 


Are alcohol sanitizers more effective than soap at killing bacteria?

Matthew T Oughton has answered Near Certain

An expert from McGill University in Infectious diseases, Microbiology

There are two main considerations to this question: (1) the ideal efficacy at killing bacteria per single application; and (2) the “real-world” effectiveness which incorporates convenience, time, and expense. In addition, for this question I shall assume we are discussing about effectiveness at killing bacterial pathogens that may be transient flora on human hands, rather than resident flora. Further, I shall also assume we are comparing conventional soap to conventional alcohol-based hand sanitizer (ABHS; 60-80% ethanol or isopropranol).

For ideal efficacy, numerous studies show a single application of ABHS is generally superior to a single application of soap and water for a wide range of bacterial pathogens. A good summary of this evidence, although dated, is the CDC’s 2002 “Guideline for Hand Hygiene in Health-Care Settings.” Generally, a 30-second application of ABHS will result in a 3-4 log10 reduction of transient flora, while the same duration of soap and water will result in a 2 log10 reduction, a relative difference of ten to one hundred-fold.

For “real-world” effectiveness, there are also numerous reasons why ABHS is superior to soap and water. Simply put, ABHS is much cheaper to install throughout healthcare facilities compared to the sinks (and plumbing) that water and soap require. Of the two, ABHS is the only one that is easily portable; small bottles can easily fit in a pocket or purse for use when a person is in transit or away from accessible sinks.

There are two notable exceptions to the overall superiority of ABHS. The first is for hands that are visibly soiled; water and soap is the preferred method for removing large amounts of organic compounds that may otherwise reduce the effectiveness of any hand hygiene method. The other exception is for prevention of transmission of spore-forming pathogens, such as Clostridium difficile. Spores are intrinsically resistant to many chemicals including alcohols; thus, if one’s hands are known or suspected to be contaminated with a spore-forming pathogen, soap and water should be used preferentially.

 

Are alcohol sanitizers more effective than soap at killing bacteria?

Ewen Todd has answered Likely

An expert from Independent in Food Safety

Ethanol-based gels are highly effective against vegetative bacteria (not spores) and enveloped viruses but less effective against non-enveloped viruses including poliovirus, calicivirus (which includes norovirus), and hepatitis A virus. In addition, soil such as dirt or protein from handling fruits, vegetables, meat, fish, etc., reduce the impact of alcohol-based antiseptics. Enveloped virus do not easily survive throughout the GI tract, whereas non-enveloped virus can, and are transmitted to surfaces or people through fecal contact (also vomitus for norovirus).

Wipes, rubs or handwashing do not need to kill the organisms, just remove them from the skin, but some usually remain and contact time is important for any disinfectant to be effective. FDA advises food workers to use soaps to clean hands, whereas alcohol-based antiseptics are widely used in health care settings.

 

Are alcohol sanitizers more effective than soap at killing bacteria?

W C Hazeleger has answered Likely

An expert from Wageningen University and Research Centre in Food Safety

Strictly speaking, alcohol sanitizers are more effective than soap at killing bacteria but this is not true for viruses. Furthermore, if hands are dirty with soil or food remnants, the efficiency of alcohol sanitizers drops dramatically. The use of soap and water will not only clean dirt from the hands, but the rinsing effect of water and/or drying with tissue paper will also reduce bacteria which might make the use of alcohol sanitizers superfluous. Further disinfection with alcohol-based hand disinfectants should only be recommended for professionals working with patients or in food preparation.

Have a question about science, health, fitness, or diet? Get cited, evidence-based insights: Consensus is an AI-Powered Academic Search Engine.

Try for free