Aren't you getting your CoSHH assessment mixed up. Hand sanitiser is not the hazard - its a possible control measure.

The hazard is the biological hazard of the rat urine and bird droppings.

For what is worth, from the information given I would agree with you. Essentially you are providing a physical barrier (gloves) from what already appears to be a low risk and possibly a non existent hazard of contacting these substances.

Hand washing facilities seem sufficient. This seems to be appropriate for what I would classify as contacting general muck from manual work. 

“The study revealed that touching intact areas of moist skin transferred enough organisms to the nurses’ hands to allow subsequent transmission to catheter material despite handwashing with plain soap and water; by contrast, alcohol-based handrubbing was effective and prevented crosstransmission to the device.” – WHO Guidelines on Hand Hygiene in Health Care, page 22

The reason that the NHS moved away from hand washing to alcohol based sanitisers is that too frequent hand washing damages the skin and leads to irritant contact dermatitis. Even the sub-clinical (invisible) irritant damage makes the skin more easily colonised by transient, potentially pathogenic, micro-organisms. Alcohol sanitiser, properly formulated, does not cause skin damage.

E-coli is only a problem for the alcohol sanitiser whilst as a spore.

Anyone wanting more on this can PM me with their contact details so that I can respond.

Chris

Chris Packham is definatly the go to guy for all things skin - but unfortunatly E-Coli is non-spore forming, gram negative bacillus - sorry Chris,

Brian - you are, of course, correct. I should have said C.Difficile. Put it down to a senior moment when under pressure of time.

However, for the record I have  several studies in my files showing that a 70% alcohol sanitiser will kill e.coli.

This are the two recommendations from epic3, the NICE accredited guidance on infection prevention:

SP6 Hands must be decontaminated: • immediately before each episode of direct patient contact or care, including clean/aseptic procedures; • immediately after each episode of direct patient contact or care; • immediately after contact with body  fluids, mucous membranes and non-intact skin; • immediately after other activities or contact with objects and equipment in the immediate patient environment that may result in the hands becoming contaminated; and • immediately after the removal of gloves. SP7 Use an alcohol-based hand rub for decontamination of hands before and after direct patient contact and clinical care, except in the following situations when soap and water must be used: • when hands are visibly soiled or potentially contaminated with body  fluids; and • when caring for patients with vomiting or diarrhoeal illness, regardless of whether or not gloves have been worn.

Issuing an alcohol hand sanitiser could be construed as discrimination - there are religions where alcohol can be problematic dependent upon interpretation of the doctrines (not only by consumption).

There is nothing stopping employees providing and using their own personal care products in the same way as an employer would not issue sun screen, deodarant etc.

Let’s get back to basics: a risk assessment.  The hazard is various pathogens which may or may not be present in rat and bird poo. The sort of microorganisms will vary depending on which animals are present and they have been doing. They might include, bacteria and virus and in the case of birds rickettsia (which are bacteria that think they are viruses). They risk they pose is probably limited to things like food poisoning/gastroenteritis type symptoms. It is unlikely that anyone will get life threatening illness from this form of contamination.  What is the route of infection? Ingestion is the only route that is likely. A few microorganism can get through the skin such as Ebola but a healthy skin is good barrier against most infections.  If people do get ill it will be from handling something contaminated and them picking up their butties and eating them without washing their hands.

When looking at controls the ideal one would be to eliminate the contamination. Is it reasonably practical to eliminate any rats and birds from the area where these items are being stored? Remember these are not life threating infections so have to balcony that risk against the cost/effort of what you are trying to eliminate.

If you can’t stop the contamination you can look at dealing with it. Alcoholic based wipes are popular when: you don’t have access to running water or if you don’t have time to thoroughly wash your hands- in hospital the staff decontaminate their hands between each patient as they’re trying to stop patient to patient transmission not trying to protect medical staff.

Washing you hands thoroughly in warm water with a decent soap is (if not don to excess) is a very good way to control microorganisms on the skin.

In my opinion the best control would be to get the staff to not eat in the loading bay areas and to wash their hands thoroughly in soap and water when they go to eat or knock off. This not always easy as some people seem to think that washing hands is for wimps. Gloves I dislike as people tend to wear them all the time at work and their hands can develop dermatitis type issues and they spread any contamination about on their glove as they move about.

Did say dependent upon interpretation - there is plenty of on-line debate within various forums some take the absolute zero approach, others who see chemical (rather than fermented for consumption) alcohols used as disinfection to be no problem and the whole spectra in between