tom,

have you considered something like Miltons which is basically sodium hypochloride 1-5% solution?

Ian

I don't think it is unreasonable for original poster to use this forum to ask for this information - could you advise why you find it so inappropriate?

Also if you could provide info on the acronyms you have used it would be helpful

Regards
FH

teo99 raises a valid question about a significant occupational health risk for significant numbers of employees working every day with incontinent people in hospitals, care homes and also the homes of such people as described by teo99.

Hopefully, some forum users involved with the types of employers and organisations involved will be able to share information and advice about the sorts of measures which are used to try to minimise the risk for such employees. It's a very unpleasant subject about which most people would prefer not to read, talk or even think - but one which nevertheless needs due attention in order to manage the occupational risk involved.

Also, pleas have been made from time to time in the past for forum users to give the full wordings for acronyms and initialised names which might be unfamiliar to some or most other users.

Like Clairel I wasn't sure about HCA, so did a quick internet search and found numerous possibilities including Healthcare Communications Association, Hospital Caterers’ Association, health care assistants, heterocyclic amines, Hereford College of Arts, Hans Christian Andersen (deceased) Helideck Certification Agency (based in Aberdeen) and the Helsinki Citizens’ Assembly!!!

Too harsh?

Well, unless you want the care of the elderly and/or other vulnerable members of society to be put at risk by second, or third rate social care services that do not follow, and apparently do not even know, the mandatory standards etc

And this compounded by a well-meant (I assume) but completely unhelpful and wrong suggestion as to some home-spun approach to care hygiene and infection prevention using an off the shelf product.

Those who don't understand the acronyms probably don't need to, while those who must do not - if they were to form any part of the extended team caring for a relative of yours, your attitude would be different, I'm sure.

Now, is this the right place to find guidance. No, it is not. Absolutely not. And those who might think that is wrong must look again at the care of the elderly and infirm. In extremis, decide if you want to take any degree of responsibility for your advice, or just hide behind a nom de plume and offer silly suggestions as if somehow ex Cathedra.

In my opinion all things [apart from real combat & 007 type areas] are covered by HSWA so this is an appropriate site to ask questions thereafter the person can be directed towards specific areas

The person should have a personal care plan and incontinent areas is a common thing and well understood so the appropriate cleaning system can be used

[A natural soap [I have found that a pure olive oil soap to be very very good] with tap water is hard to beat & I would advise to use that as the first point of call - mixing chemicals on site is really a 'no' 'no' and a persons dignity must be considered especially so as they are in their own home]

And as already pointed out procuring 'off the shelf' substances from an average shop is not the way to go and the various specialists CQC, PCT, HCA etc should be able to provide advice

There are from time to time questions asked on this forum that on the face of it are amazingly naive, seemingly exposing concerning and dangerous gaps in knowledge. However, in some of the cases that have alarmed me I have later realised that the original poster is likely to be an interested observer seeking confirmation that what is being done is correct, rather than an incompetent practitioner.

A metaphorical smack around the head with a lead-filled sock is an understandable response but maybe not the best one.

Clairel well put.

What's a cathedra?

Before users of this forum jump onto their mightily high horses when responding, you should read the post... the OP was asking if anyone had heard of a product that you can simply drop into a bath. Asking such a question does not instantly equate to the fact that he/she are incompetent in their particular field.

Maybe the infection control policy is already in place and they are looking to improve it, maybe they are looking to make the infection control when handling elderly pateints easier and safer for both parties.......

This forum is about asking for help and advice, not about receiving lectures from those who seem to 'know everything' and are above giving advice....

I feel some individuals may have scared the questioner off!

It's a shame as due to constraints more and more adults are now being given care hours in their own home to support social budget controls and no doubt is big business for some parties.
I just hope that these new business ventures provide the necessary advice to the new carers being recruited in larger numbers!

Anyway apart from prevention and PPE, what's wrong with considering a solution of sodium hypochloride <5% for sanitising as I beleive it's been used for years in various forms/names?

Apologies: I should have thought a little more regarding my comments above about bleach solutions. Most swimming pools are disinfected with sodium hypochlorite -which explains why swimmers tend to have a chlorine smell afterwards! However, it's some time since I dealt with swimming pools, so I can't recall what degree of dilution is involved. For our general edification, please can anyone say what the usual dilution is in pools?

I did scratch my head!

Off the op of my head, as I am at home without my pool book, Sodium Hypochlorite is a commonly used disinfectant in swimming pools; there are others.

‘Dilution’ is dependant on a number of factors including the pH of the water, whether other forms of disinfection are used e.g. UV.

Free Chlorine levels should be as low as possible in order to achieve microbiological control, for an indoor pool within a pH range of 7.2-7.4 this would typically be around 0.5 - 1.0 mg/l and normally no more than 2.0 mg/l. Pools that also use UV can generally have a lower free Chlorine level.

Combined Chlorine (this is what gives pools it’s Chlorine smell) should be kept as low as possible, always less than the free chlorine level and ideally less than half.

Out of interest, and relevant to this thread, is that when there is faecal contamination of a pool, the pool must be cleared, the free Chlorine level raised to the top of the recommended range and the pool water must complete 6 full cycles, and the filters backwashed prior to re-occupation. Chlorine and other biocides are generally relatively effective against most organisms likely to occur in pools however, Cryptosporidium and Giardia are resistant and are best dealt with through the use of a flocculant and physical filtration.

Sorry, not meaning to hijack the thread.

Speaking generally, but directed most specifically to those who have an opinion about everything and just about as many answers, but who care little about the salience of what they say, those who feel this site is an appropriate source for infection prevention and control information, which may be fixed by an agreed policy and will generally be directed by strict guidelines. Of course, that information is not in the domain of the safety generalists and others here, including those who might be more at home on the railways or on a building site.

Regrettably, it is those same groups who feel able to expound upon almost anything, generally without evidence and often without experience in that subject area.

Criticism brings a collective howl of condemnation - some of it regrettable childish in nature - by those who feel able to criticise all others regardless. The mentality seems to be that of the playground pack; hiding behind a nom de plume makes the situation worse since inadequate or frankly wrong advice is rendered meaningless as it originates from someone who does not identify themselves.

Of course many will wriggle away from this with the classic mantra that, of course, you are only offering advice. There is some collective, and quite foolish, assumption that your advice is given without any responsibility, or perhaps understanding. Too often the advice is incomplete and incorrect (see above re Miltons [sic]). Too often, this standard is evident also in the workplace and does the 'profession' no favours whatsoever.

I'm guessing that 'pontificating' is some kind of settee? Oh, this furniture-based safety baffles me so.

To echo a suggestion I made some months ago, do other users think this forum should display to all viewers a disclaimer to remind them that no reliance should be placed on information and comments seen on it? The previous version of the forum had such a disclaimer.

With or without a disclaimer, the contents of this discussion forum, open to all users, are variously useful, boring, irrelevant, amusing, ignorant, enquiring, downright wrong, misleading, provocative, cringeworthy, etc. etc. Though there is some moderation (by volunteers) and some users are willing to point out incorrect or misleading information, surely it's up to users/readers ultimately to assess what they read on it. The same should apply to what people see elsewhere on the internet, in newspapers and on TV, etc.

p.s. safetyamateur - isn't pontificating something which pontiffs do?!!!! However, it could also be something to do with bridges in France and also Wales!

Ian - we don't all work with English agencies so I thought asking for more detail on acronyms was a valid question.... my apologies for asking for more info.. even though I probably didn't need to know!!

Regards
FH

Ah, while I was away others have stolen my thunder! And I also thank the mods for a sensible and proportionate response as well.

Firstly, those of us that have been here some time will already know that while many of Ian’s post’s are often ‘robust’ his ‘advice‘ (I’ll come back to that later) also appears similarly so. It is important though that misleading or unhelpful ‘advice’ is ‘challenged’ if necessarily ‘robustly’ . In saying that, as we all (mostly) know, it’s not necessarily what you say but how you say it, and I think we can all probably learn to perhaps be a little more careful in our choice of words at times.

I do have some sympathy with Ian’s general comments that infection control in the scenario first posted, is probably more of a matter for the health professionals, rather than something to be dabbled in and I suspect that there is some good advice and guidance already out there.

As far as advice goes, we’ve all seen the ’howlers’ and the ‘yes’ or ‘no’ responses to questions which are in the main of very limited (if any) help unless there is some subsequent basis or reasoning for their response. If you’re giving advice, do try and ’back it up’ if appropriate and if you’re asking for advice do try and give a full and accurate account of the situation, and I suggest that you use any ‘advice’ given here as the basis for YOUR further investigation/research.

Shall we all take a step back and count to ten?

PS - in response to Grahams post at #25, people not showering BEFORE bathing does add considerably to the ’load’ placed on swimming pool plant etc. The chlorine smell is the combined chlorine that has been ’used’ (laymans term) to kill off the various bugs, dirt, grime etc. No piddling in the deep end!

Bob, that the post, and my previous one was in response to Graham's query' about swimming pools and is NOT directly related to the original post on bathing.

I think I/we are in danger of hijacking the thread. No I don't think it necessarily means that disinfection levels are low, but that the 'balance' (balanced water is a different thing) between free or available CL and combined CL is 'wrong' i.e. taht the combined level is too high. This can be caused by a variety of things, often a sudden increase in bather load. A strong smell of CL (the smell is actually Chloramines) does however, suggest that the water quality is not what it might be.

Most 'modern' set ups have automatic dosing machines that constantly monitor the water quality and adjust the pH and disinfectant levels as necessary. In general, while I suppose that there is always a tangible risk of picking up a 'bug', most vulnerable people (I include myself) should be confident of bathing in a well run swimming pool.

The conundrum was actually answered earlier. It is the use of latex/similar impermeable gloves and standard washing aids and soap/similar. This is standard bathing technology.

Sanitisation occurrs post bathing. I am definitely not confusing bathing with bathing as the latter uses a pool in which you could swim:-)

Bob

Please note that the original posting was asking if a product was available in the event of a person being incontinent during bathing as stated earlier in the discussion. Many people have then been somewhat hard on the person asking the question pointing out all manner of things without actually helping the person. Many of the national guidelines in infection control do not specifically mention what products to use, just demand certain standards be met with respect to cleanliness and disinfection.

Some people have responded that various organisations might be able to help although some of these are standard setters rather than implementers so may not be aware of the various products available.

The best solution (no pun intended) would be to contact an Infection Control Nurse at either the local Primary Care Trust or at a local hospital. These people have a wealth of knowledge and are always glad to help out.

Take care
John C