Headspace Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectroscopy Analysis and Antibacterial Tests of Commercial Hand Sanitizers

Year 2022, Volume: 9 Issue: 1, 37 - 44, 30.03.2022

Simge Varlık Gülşen Bayrak Işık Perçin Demirçelik Aybuke A. Isbır Turan

https://doi.org/10.17350/HJSE19030000253

Cited By: 1

Abstract

As of late 2019, with the rapid and alarming spread of the SARS-Cov-2 (Covid-19) virus from the coronavirus family, serious measures had to be taken all over the world. The efforts to prevent this global epidemic have started with the legal measures taken by the countries in this regard and the warnings of the World Health Organization (WHO) that the epidemic should be taken seriously. In this process, the success of the use of masks and the use of alcohol-based hand sanitizer in preventing the disease has been evaluated and approved by scientists. In terms of the effectiveness of hand sanitizers, it is seen that the main components are ethyl alcohol and isopropyl alcohol, which are alcohol derivatives and they are considered as active ingredients due to their antibacterial and antiseptic effect. In this study, 11 commercially purchased hand sanitizer active and additional ingredients were identified and listed by headspace gas chromatography-mass spectroscopy (HS/GCMS) and their antibacterial activities were studied. Hand sanitizers containing alcohol derivatives were used in the study. As a result of this study, it was observed that 4 out of
11 commercial hand sanitizers were not suitable for the final concentration values of hand sanitizer determined by the World Health Organization (accepted as 80%(v/v) for alcohol derivatives). Apart from this, hand sanitizers numbered 5 and 9 did not show antibacterial properties against Escherichia coli and hand sanitizers numbered 1 and 10 did not show antibacterial properties against Staphylococcus aureus. This situation shows that the standards of hand sanitizers should be controlled with much more stringent rules.

Keywords

GC-MS, headspace, hand sanitizer, antibacterial, alcohol

Thanks

Turkish National Police Academy, Institute of Forensic Sciences, Forensic Chemistry Laboratories, Ankara, Turkey, and Hacettepe University, Department of Biology, Ankara 06800, Turkey

References

• 1. Gold NA, Mirza TM, Avva U. Alcohol sanitizer. StatPearls Publishing. Treasure Island (FL), (2020)
• 2. Nyamwweya NN, Abuga KO. Alcohol-Based hand sanitizers – A multidimensional perspective. Preprints (2020)
• 3. Hilburn J, Hammond BS, Fendler EJ, Groziak PA. Use of alcohol hand sanitizer as an infection control strategy in an acute care facility. American Journal of Infection Control 31-2, (2003) 109–116.
• 4. WHO. Guide to local production: WHO-recommended handrub formulations (PDF). April (2010). Retrieved 27 February 2020.
• 5. Thomson E, Bullied A. Production of Ethanol-based hand sanitizer in breweries during the COVID-19 crisis, Technical Quarterly 57, (2020) 47-52.
• 6. WHO. Guidelines on hand hygiene in health care, Part I, Chapter 10, (2019) 28.
• 7. Biyosidal ürünlerin kullanım usul ve esasları hakkında yönetmelik. (2019) https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2019/07/20190704-2.html (date of access: 01 Aug 2021)
• 8. Pragst F, Auwaerter V, Sporkert F, Spiegel K. Analysis of fatty acid ethyl esters in hair as possible markers of chronically elevated alcohol consumption by headspace solid-phase microextraction (HS-SPME) and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS). Forensic Science International 121(1-2), (2001) 76–88.
• 9. Bouche MP, Lambert WE, Van Bocxlaer JF, Piette MH, De Leenheer AP. Quantitative determination of n-propane, isobutane and n-butane by headspace GC-MS in intoxications by inhalation of lighter fluid. J. Anal. Toxicol 26, (2002) 35-42. 10. Stambouli A, El Bouri A, Bouayoun T, Bellimam MA. Headspace-GC/MS detection of TATP traces in post-explosion debris, Forensic Science International 146 S (2004) 191-194.
• 11. Wang Y, McCaffrey J, Norwood DL. Recent advances in headspace gas chromatography. Journal of liquid chromatography related technologies 31 (2008), 1823-1851.
• 12. Joshi M, Rigsby K, Almirall JR. Analysis of the headspace composition of smokeless powders using GC-MS, GC-𝜇ECD and ion mobility spectrometry. Forensic Science International 208 (2011) 29-36.
• 13. Desharnais B. Huppé G. Lamarche M, Mireault P, Skinner CD. Cyanide quantification in post-mortem biological matrices by headspace GC-MS. Forensic Science International 222, 1-3, (2012) 346–351.
• 14. Wu SH, Chi JH, Wu YT, Huang YH, Chu FJ, Horng JJ. Thermal hazard analysis of triacetone triperoxide (TATP) by DSC and GC/MS. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries 25(2012) 1069-1074.
• 15. Almog J, Espino D, Tamiri T, Sonenfeld D. Trace analysis of urea nitrate in post-blast debris by GC/MS. Forensic Science International 224 (2013) 80-83.
• 16. Lennert E, Bridge C. Analysis and classification of smokeless powders by GC-MS and DART-TOFMS. Forensic Science International 292 (2018) 11-22.
• 17. Bedner M, Murray J, Urbas AA, MacCrehan WA, Wilson, WB. Comparison of measurement methods for alcohol-based hand sanitizers, NIST Interagency/Internal Report (NISTIR), National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, (2021).
• 18. Topçu G, Barla A, Gören AC, Bilsel G, Tümen G. Analysis of the essential oil composition of Sideritis albiflora using direct thermal desorption and headspace GC-MS techniques. Turk J Chem, 29 (2005) 525 – 529.
• 19. Özkahraman B, Tamahkar E, İdil N, Kılıç-Suloglu A, Perçin, I. Evaluation of hyaluronic acid nanoparticle embedded chitosan–gelatin hydrogels for antibiotic release. Drug Development Research (2020).
• 20. Traoré O, Allaert FA, Fournet-Fayard S, Verrière JL, Laveran H. Comparison of in-vivo antibacterial activity of two skin disinfection procedures for insertion of peripheral catheters: Povidone iodine versus chlorhexidine. Journal of Hospital Infection 44(2), (2000) 147–150.