Next Article in Journal
Correction: Lovell et al. Multiple Lenses to Unearth Hidden Voices: Living with Diabetic Foot Ulceration in an Afro-Caribbean Community. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2025, 22, 304
Next Article in Special Issue
Work-Related Triggers of Mental Illness Relapse in South African Teachers
Previous Article in Journal
The Dual Impact of Digital Connectivity: Balancing Productivity and Well-Being in the Modern Workplace
Previous Article in Special Issue
Inxeba Elinga Phakathi: The Danger of Mental Health Invisibility and the Role of Social Community Caregiving
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJERPH
Volume 22
Issue 6
10.3390/ijerph22060846
ijerph-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Monitoring the Effectiveness of a Preschool Hand Hygiene Intervention Using Flow Cytometry to Determine the Reduction in the Microbiological Counts

by
Samantha Lange
1,*,
Tobias George Barnard
1,
Nisha Naicker
2,3 and
Atheesha Singh
1
1
Water and Health Research Centre, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Johannesburg, P.O. Box 17011, Doornfontein, Johannesburg 2028, South Africa
2
Environmental Health Department, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Johannesburg, P.O. Box 17011, Doornfontein, Johannesburg 2028, South Africa
3
Epidemiology and Surveillance, National Institute for Occupational Health, National Health Laboratory Services, Braamfontein 2001, South Africa
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2025, 22(6), 846; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph22060846
Submission received: 3 April 2025 / Revised: 23 May 2025 / Accepted: 26 May 2025 / Published: 28 May 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue SDG 3 in Sub-Saharan Africa: Emerging Public Health Issues)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

Hand hygiene (HH)-related illnesses, such as diarrhea, are one of the leading causes of death in children under five, whereas handwashing with soap can reduce infection rates in this age group. This study monitored whether a simple intervention in the form of a handwashing exercise could reduce the pathogens on preschool children’s hands, potentially reducing HH-related diseases. Hand bag-wash samples were collected from preschool children (N = 160) participating in an intervention study. The samples were collected pre- and post-intervention from the intervention group (IG) and control group (CG). The samples were analyzed using flow cytometry, where the microbiological counts and turbidity were compared between the left and right hands, genders, and pre- and post-intervention groups. The results indicated no significant difference in the microbiological counts of the left and right hands or between the genders of participants, with a significant reduction in intact live cells on the IG children’s hands post-intervention (p = 0.000). There was a significant positive correlation (p = 0.000) between the turbidity pre- and post-handwashing, with a decreased mean in terms of the turbidity recorded for both groups. Handwashing either with or without soap reduced the microbiological counts on preschoolers’ hands. Reinforcing handwashing at critical times and promoting correct handwashing procedures can assist in reducing hand-hygiene-related diseases in preschool children.

1. Introduction

Two leading causes of death in children under the age of 5 years in South Africa remain gastric and respiratory infections [1]. Although there are large bodies of evidence to suggest that handwashing with soap can reduce the infection rates of such illnesses, they are still a frequent occurrence and the burdens of these diseases are felt within the child population [2]. Contaminated hands play a major role in pathogenic transmission and it has been established that hands can carry different types of pathogenic material [3]. Several observational studies have shown that children place objects or fingers in their mouths regularly, and hand samples have revealed both animal and human fecal matter on children’s hands, increasing their risk of diarrheal diseases [4,5,6]. Studies have shown that there may be an increased bacterial load on the dominant hand as it is thought that this hand is more likely to be used to pick up objects [7]. According to reports, higher standards of hygiene are normally found in girls under five years of age [8].
Handwashing interventions can reduce diarrheal diseases by as much as 30% [9]. Studies indicate that handwashing with soap compliance (before the COVID-19 pandemic) was as low as 19% worldwide [10] and that children’s hand hygiene (HH) compliance was around 42% [11]. It can be expected that this figure will have improved during 2020–22 as there is research to suggest that fear during pandemics increases compliance with HH practices [12]. Recent studies have shown that compliance wanes over time regardless of external factors, such as pandemics [13,14]. Hand hygiene interventions are well documented and range from providing water, sanitation and hygiene [15] to providing education on hand hygiene with practical demonstrations of how to wash hands [16,17,18]. Proper hand hygiene could prevent hygiene-related diseases in preschool children, and therefore, ensuring proper and effective handwashing amongst preschoolers could assist in preventing or reducing the occurrence of these diseases.
Studies of hand hygiene in low- to middle-income (LMI) countries have stated that people in these countries are 69% more likely to have hands contaminated with Escherichia coli than their higher-income-country counterparts [19]. Although South Africa falls within the LMI bracket, StasSA (2024) has reported that 82.7% of South Africans have access to piped water [20]. In the context of this research setting within suburban preschools, where all households have access to piped water, it can be assumed that a far lesser percentage of children may have hands contaminated with E. coli, which is similar to the findings in HI countries, where only 6% of people’s hands were contaminated [19]. The unique methodology of data analysis and reporting of hand “bag-wash” sample results in this study explores the possibility that although traditional fecal indicators such as E. coli were not found on the children’s hands, the indicators used would show that their hands were either correctly washed to remove bacterial cells or not.
This study investigated whether a simple hand hygiene intervention administered to preschool children aged 4–5 years could reduce the microbiological counts on their hands by analyzing the results of bag-wash samples to determine if the reduction was due to the removal, inactivation, or death of bacteria. Research has shown that bacteria can enter a viable but non-culturable state [21], which could result in overestimating the effectiveness of procedures like handwashing; therefore, flow cytometry was used instead of typical culture-based methods to study the microbial population of the hand wash samples collected with the bag-wash method [22].
The objectives were to compare the microbial counts of the left and right hands, the differences between the microbial counts on boys’ and girls’ hands and the differences in microbial counts between the intervention group (IG), who were administered the hand hygiene intervention, and the control group (CG), who were not.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Design

This study was a pre- and post-test conducted at preschools located in the Kempton Park suburbs of the city of Ekurhuleni, South Africa [23]. Considering the resources available, a random sampling approach was used and targeted children attending preschool between the ages of 4 and 5 years. The legal parent, guardian and relevant authority were provided with information pertaining to this study and provided their written informed consent to allow their children to participate in this study. Children gave informed assent by making use of a pictorial representation of the sample process and affixing a sticker to the assent form if they agreed to participate. The study design was approved by the University of Johannesburg’s Faculty of Health Sciences Research Ethics Committee (REC-01-165-2017) and the Ministerial Consent for Non-Therapeutic Research on Minors for Department of Health National Ethics Research Council (GP-201804-002) and was conducted in compliance with procedures approved under a published study protocol [24].

2.2. Sample Collection

A controlled intervention study was conducted at randomly selected preschools in Ekurhuleni, Gauteng (N = 17), from February to December 2019. The schools were randomly placed into the intervention (n = 9) and control (n = 10) groups, with 160 children (N = 160) participating pre-intervention (IG n = 81 and CG n = 79) and 148 children (N = 148) participating post-intervention (IG n = 77 and CG n = 71). Bag-wash samples were taken at both the IG and CG schools, with the sample collectors attempting to sample at a similar time in the morning both pre- and post-intervention, while the children were still in the classroom and had not yet moved to the outside play area. In the pre-intervention study, the right- and left-hand bag-wash samples were collected from the participating children separately in sterile polyethylene Ziploc bags containing 70 mL sterile phosphate-buffered saline solution (Sigma Life Sciences, St. Louis, MO, USA; pH 7.02). The children’s hands were sampled during their current classroom activity and each child was required to rinse each hand in the bag for approximately 20 s. A note was made on the gender of each child, according to their sex assigned at birth, as the sample was collected.
The post-intervention sampling occurred two months after the pre-intervention samples were collected and after the intervention was applied to the intervention group. Bag-wash samples were collected from the participating children during their current classroom activity, with the children being required to wash both their hands, by interlocking their digits for approximately 20 s, in a single sterile polyethylene Ziploc bag containing 100 mL sterile phosphate-buffered saline solution (Sigma Life Sciences; pH 7.02). These samples were labeled as “before” samples. The children were then instructed to wash their hands as they normally would and return for an “after” sample. The “after” bag-wash sample was collected in the same way as the “before” sample but in a separate bag. Notes were made as to whether the children used soap or not when washing their hands prior to the “after” bag-wash sample being collected. During this study, additional resources such as soap or paper towels were not provided; however, schools without this equipment were not excluded from this study and children made use of the hand wash facilities and equipment normally provided to them on a daily basis.

2.3. Sample Analysis

Quantitative analysis was applied to the pre-intervention (right and left) bag-wash samples to test for the viable (intact) and total bacterial cell populations using flow cytometry (FCM). The samples were analyzed separately (70 mL quantity) and were then combined (100 mL quantity adjusted) so that the combined (100 mL) results could be compared to the post-intervention samples in a like-for-like quantity (100 mL).
Flow cytometric (FCM) analysis was performed on the BD Accuri C6 with CSampler according to Singh et al., 2019 [22]. Briefly, 500 μL of bag-wash sample was stained at 37 °C for 10 min with SYBR Green I (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA, USA) at a concentration of 1X for the total bacterial cell counts and with SYBR Green I (Invitrogen) at a concentration of 1X co-stained with 6 μM propidium iodide (PI) (BD Biosciences, San Jose, CA, USA) for the intact bacterial cell counts. The stained samples were then measured separately at medium speed using an FL1-H acquisition threshold of 800. The Eawag bacterial cell analysis template was used to detect the bacterial cell populations by electronic gating, and manual compensation was used where necessary to separate positive signals from debris, as indicated in Figure 1 [21]. The flow cytometry targeted all the bacteria present on the children’s hands and was able to indicate more than one group of bacteria. It compensated for the viable but non-culturable bacteria that would have skewed any culture-based data.
Based on previous FCM studies, the viability status of the bacteria was inferred by nucleic acid staining, which separated the bacteria into live and dead cells, with live cells further characterized as having high or low nucleic acid content [22,25,26]. The HNA-stained cells were classified as being active (alive and culturable) bacteria in a community, whilst the LNA-stained cells were classified as being metabolically active bacterial cells (viable but non-culturable) that could become dormant in adverse environmental conditions. Singh et al. (2019) reported that high levels of LNA bacterial cells were considered to be transient flora on human hands [22].
The post-intervention data per set of 100 mL bag-wash samples were analyzed for turbidity and viable (intact) and total bacterial cell populations.
The turbidity was measured in nephelometric turbidity units (NTUs). The turbidity of the hand wash samples was determined using the TN-100 Turbidimeter (Eutech, Singapore). Before the sample readings, the turbidimeter instrument was calibrated as recommended by the manufacturer and the South African Water Quality guideline standards. The primary standards included 0.02, 20.0, 100, and 800 nephelometric turbidity units (NTUs) provided along with the meter. The sample vessel was rinsed three times with at least 10 mL of the sample, after which the sample was added to the vessel up to the mark indicated on the vessel. The reading was read with the turbidimeter and used as read. Any differences in the turbidity pre- and post-handwashing was recorded along with the log10 reductions in both the live (intact) cells and total bacterial count. The turbidity counts were included to determine if it would be an easy method to estimate bacterial contamination in the hand wash samples without the need for FCM or culture-based methods, and to determine if the bacterial loads were potentially linked to dirt on the hands. In a review article published by De Roos et al. (2017), they reported that there were positive associations between drinking-water turbidity and acute gastrointestinal illness in various cities [27].

2.4. Data Analysis

Data were captured on an Excel spreadsheet and uploaded to IBM SPSS Statistics version 26 for statistical analysis. All the FCM data were processed with the BD Accuri C6 software version 1.0.264.21 (BD Biosciences), and boxplots were computed with GraphPad Prism 10 software. Pre-intervention, a non-parametric test was conducted (Mann–Whitney U test) to determine the differences between the results of the right and left hands and Spearman’s rho non-parametric correlation coefficient was used to assess the relationship between the total bacterial count and the intact live cells count on both the right and left hands. The same tests were conducted on the results for gender differences. Post-intervention, a Spearman’s correlation test was run to determine the relationship between the total cell count and the intact live cells before and after children had washed their hands with or without using soap. A dataset was created for the results of all the children whose hands were sampled prior to the intervention and post-intervention (N = 148) in both the IG and CG so that the pre-intervention results could be accurately compared to the post-intervention results. A Friedman test was conducted in order to measure the three points in time to obtain a mean rank and a Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to indicate significant differences between these.

2.5. Intervention

Figure 2 provides a schematic representation of the intervention that was conducted on the IG within a month of the pre-intervention data collection. The intervention was administered to the children in the IG, their parents and the preschool by the researcher, who, as a qualified environmental health practitioner, was equipped to provide the intervention. An interactive learning exercise was used for the children. This was conducted by the researcher using “simulation education” with the application of GloGerm® to the children’s hands to simulate germ distribution. The children rubbed GloGerm® onto their hands and then placed them into a “Magic Box”, which was a black box fitted with an ultraviolet black light and a viewing hole to allow the children to see the “germs” glowing on their hands. They were then taught to wash their hands using the WHO method, and once again, placed their hands inside the box. Correct handwashing would remove all the “germs” and they would not be visible under the ultraviolet black light. The class was also given a three-week hand wash reminder chart, where the children placed stickers on the chart for every day they washed their hands correctly, and hand wash poster reminders to wash their hands at critical times. The reminder chart was used to reiterate the handwashing actions consistently for a period of time as children learn best through repetition and the motivation and reward that the stickers provide, both of which have been known to affect and assist behavior change [28].
The results regarding additional intervention aspects such as the monthly inspections and HH information relayed to parents have been previously reported [23,29] and are shown in Figure 2 to provide context.

3. Results

The total and intact (live) bacterial populations for the left and right hands as well as the distribution of low nucleic acid (LNA) and high nucleic acid (HNA) content bacteria are illustrated in Figure 3. The total bacterial population includes both live and damaged cells, while the intact population only represents live bacterial cells.
In Table 1, the pre-intervention bag-wash results, with the combined totals and genders, show that there was no significant difference between the right and left hands (right hand p = 0.167 and left hand p = 0.325) and no difference between the right and left hands in relation to gender (right hand p = 0.434 and left hand p = 0.296). The Spearman’s rho non-parametric correlation coefficient indicates a moderately strong correlation between the intact live cells and the total bacterial count for both the right (r2 = 0.832; p = 0.000; N = 160), left (r2 = 0.815; p = 0.000; N = 160) and combined hands (r2 = 0.838; p = 0.000; N = 160).
Post-intervention samples were drawn from 148 children (IG n = 77 and CG n = 71). A Spearman’s correlation test was run to determine the relationship between the total cell count and the intact live cells before and after the children had washed their hands with or without using soap. There is a moderate positive correlation between the total cell count and the intact live cells (r2 = 0.332) before the children went to wash their hands, with a similar moderate correlation (r2 = 0.557) in the samples taken after handwashing. All the children used soap to wash their hands if it was available. Twelve of the children from two preschools in the IG did not have soap available and so were not able to use soap to wash their hands, whereas the remaining sixty-five children from seven preschools used the soap available to them. In the CG, 42 children from five preschools did not have access to soap and 29 children from the remaining five preschools did have access to and used soap.
There was a significant correlation in the IG between the intact live cells and the total cell count before handwashing (r2 = 0.306, n = 77, p = 0.007), while after handwashing, the correlation was slightly stronger (r2 = 0.566, n = 77, p = 0.000). The CG had a similar result with a moderate correlation (r2 = 371, n = 71, p = 0.001) before handwashing and a slightly stronger correlation afterwards (r2 = 521, n = 71, p = 0.000). The mean intact live cell count in all the samples before handwashing was 12 × 107, and after handwashing, it reduced to a mean of 7 × 106. The test was repeated on the children who used soap (n = 99) and those who did not use soap (n = 49) regardless of which group they were in. There was a significant correlation between the live intact cells and the total cell count (r2 = 0.327, n = 49, p = 0.022) in the hand samples of the “no soap” group before handwashing, with a similar correlation (r2 = 0.563, n = 49, p = 0.000) after handwashing. The “soap” group had a moderate correlation before handwashing (r2 = 0.366, n = 99, p = 0.000), with little significant correlation afterwards (r2 = 0.559, n = 99, p = 0.000).
The turbidity before handwashing was measured in both the IG and CG, with the mean turbidity in the IG measuring 78.2179 NTU (nephelometric turbidity unit) and in the CG measuring 141.0746 NTU. After handwashing, the mean turbidity was 27.4001 NTU for the IG and 44.3429 for the CG. A decreased mean of 50.8178 NTU for the IG and 96.7317 NTU for the CG was recorded. The difference in turbidity before and after handwashing was measured in both the “soap” and the “no soap” groups. The mean turbidity in the “no soap” group before handwashing was 80.83734694 NTU and in the “soap” group was 69.33575758 NTU. The turbidity before and after handwashing in both the “soap” and “no soap” groups was analyzed. There was a mean reduction of 67.0841 NTU in the “soap” group and 80.8373 NTU in the “no soap” group. There was a significant positive correlation between the turbidity pre- and post-handwashing in the “no soap” group (r = 0.489; N = 49; sig. = 0.000) and the “soap” group (r = 0.580; N = 98; sig. = 0.000).
A dataset was created for the results of all the children whose hands were sampled prior to the intervention and post-intervention (N = 148) in both the IG and CG so that the pre-intervention results could be accurately compared to the post-intervention results. The data for the total cells and total intact live cells pre-intervention were compared with the total cells and total intact live cells post-intervention prior to handwashing as well as to the total cells and total live cells after handwashing. Table 2 indicates the results for the male and female children in the IG and CG pre-intervention, post-intervention before washing hands and post-intervention after washing hands with or without soap.
A Friedman test was conducted in order to measure the three points in time to obtain a mean rank. The results of the Wilcoxon signed-rank test indicated significant differences (p = 0.000) between these three results in the IG and CG for the total cell count, where the post-intervention pre-handwashing total cell count was significantly different to the pre- and final post-intervention samples in both groups (Figure 4). The same analysis was conducted on the total intact cells for the same three points in time. The result indicates a significant difference (p = 0.000) in the IG between the pre-intervention, post-intervention, pre-handwashing and post-intervention post-handwashing intact live cell counts. In the CG, there was no significance placed on the difference in the counts pre- and post-intervention (p = 0.231), but there was a significant difference (p = 0.000) between the post-intervention pre-handwashing and post-intervention post-handwashing intact live cell counts.
The equation below was used to calculate the percentage reduction:
P e r c e n t a g e   r e d u c t i o n = A − B × 100 A
where A is the number of viable microorganisms before the treatment and B is the number of viable microorganisms after the treatment.
The effect size between the pre- and post-intervention intact live cell counts through the application of Cohen’s d indicated a medium effect (d = 0.42), with a small effect (d = 0.25) between the post-intervention pre-handwashing and post-intervention post-handwashing intact live cell counts.

4. Discussion

The results of the hand swab samples were compared to determine whether the microbiological counts on the hands had decreased post-intervention. The pre-intervention hand samples for both the IG and CG showed no significant difference in the cleanliness of boys’ and girls’ hands, which contradicts previous studies. These studies reported that a higher standard of hand hygiene was found in girls, especially in the under-five age group [8], and that according to a meta-analysis of health behaviors in adolescents, girls washed their hands consistently more than boys [30]. Pre-intervention hand swab samples were taken from both the right and left hands to determine whether the dominant hand carried a higher microbiological load as a result of the dominant hand being used more frequently to pick up objects [7]. According to the analysis, there was no significant difference between the dominant and other hand.
Due to the results of the pre-intervention samples, the post-intervention samples were collected by washing both hands together in a single bag. The purpose of these samples was to determine if the intervention had helped the IG to wash their hands more effectively, thereby reducing the microbiological counts on the hands in this group. In both the IG and CG, some preschools did not have soap available but all had running water and wash basins for handwashing. In schools where soap was available, the children used soap to wash their hands without prompting from caregivers or the researcher. The total cell count, active live cells and turbidity were measured in the samples from both groups, prior to handwashing and post-handwashing, keeping note of the “soap” and no soap” groups. There was a reduction in turbidity in both the IG and CG, with a positive correlation between the “soap” and “no soap” groups both pre- and post-handwashing. Higher fecal bacterial counts have been associated with higher levels of turbidity in hand bag-wash samples in previous studies [31], indicating that the reduced turbidity found in both groups regardless of whether they used soap or not showed that the simple mechanism of rubbing hands together with clean water as per the WHO’s recommended method could potentially improve hand hygiene. As there was a correlation between the total cell counts and the live active cells, in both groups, the motion of washing and rinsing the hands in clean water could remove some micro-organisms from the hands, providing a similar result to a study in Indonesia, which reported that children who washed their hands using more motions displayed a reduction in E. coli on the hands [32]. It has been reported that there are associations between soil microbial contamination and diarrheal diseases in children [33], making the understanding of dirty hands important, especially in children. The results of this study showed that a simple hand rinse (washing without soap) reduced the bacterial loads in the control schools comparably to the intervention schools, suggesting that the mere removal of dirt could reduce the risk of disease.
Comparative analysis of the results from the bag-wash samples of those children who were present for both the pre- and post-intervention sampling provided an opportunity to compare a robust, valid sample, as only those children who were present at both opportunities were included in the sample for this analysis. There was a significant difference in the results of the IG live intact cell counts pre- and post-intervention, which was not observed in the CG. As only the IG was exposed to the intervention, this could indicate that the intervention assisted with improved handwashing techniques, thereby dislodging live intact cells, as not seen in the CG. The method of reporting the differences in the total cell counts and intact cell counts is a novel one, as the previous literature does not report on such cell counts but rather results based on microbial growth pre- and post-intervention, as reported in a systematic review of hand contamination studies [19].

5. Conclusions

The purpose of this study was to discover whether a simple intervention would reduce the microbial counts on the hands of preschoolers. The total cell count and live intact cell count have been established for these preschool children based on gender, both prior to and after washing their hands. The intervention was intended to teach children the correct way to wash their hands (WHO method), making use of an entertaining and cost-effective intervention. Although there was improvement in both the intervention and control groups pre- and post-intervention, there was a significant reduction in the live cell counts in the IG, indicating that this group used the WHO method to better effect than the CG. Washing hands, either with or without soap, while using the mechanics of rubbing the hands under running water can reduce the microbiological counts on the hands of preschoolers. Therefore, reinforcing the washing of hands at critical times and ensuring correct handwashing procedures can assist in reducing hand-hygiene-related diseases in preschool children. Including handwashing with soap teaching activities for preschool children will increase compliance and ensure that no transient microbes, which could cause disease, remain on the hands.
Several limitations were identified during this study, notably the lack of consistency in the activities of the children from one school to another during the bag-wash sample collection process. Each school was a private facility, following their own programs and curriculums. During sample collection, some children were drawing or writing; in other classes, they may have been painting; and in yet others, it was story time, which could have influenced the results of the samples. In addition, the left- and right-handedness of the children was not noted during the pre-intervention sampling, and although the results showed no significant differences between the two, there are other aspects such as cultural behaviors of using the dominant versus non-dominant hand for certain activities. As the sample population was drawn from a cohort of regulated and compliant preschools, it provided an opportunity to study hand hygiene compliance in a well-resourced setting. There is an opportunity for a future study to provide a comparison between suburban, well-resourced preschools and those in rural and underserved communities to determine whether an intervention such as this could positively influence the microbiological counts.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.L., T.G.B. and N.N.; methodology, S.L. and T.G.B.; validation, S.L., T.G.B., N.N. and A.S.; formal analysis, S.L., T.G.B. and A.S.; investigation, S.L.; resources, T.G.B. and A.S.; data curation, S.L.; writing—original draft preparation, S.L.; writing—review and editing, T.G.B., N.N. and A.S.; visualization, S.L. and T.G.B.; supervision, T.G.B. and N.N.; project administration, S.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the National Research Foundation of South Africa (NRF ZAR) Thuthuka Grant (UID:121962).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Approved by the University of Johannesburg’s Faculty of Health Sciences Research Ethics Committee (REC-01-165-2017) on 12 March 2018 and the Ministerial Consent for Non-Therapeutic Research on Minors for Department of Health National Ethics Research Council (GP-201804-002) on 10 May 2018.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in this study.

Data Availability Statement

Data are available on request from the authors.

Acknowledgments

We acknowledge the technical support accorded to this study by the research staff of the Water and Health Research Centre (WHRC), Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Johannesburg.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. StatsSA. STATISTICAL RELEASE Mortality and Causes of Death in South Africa: Findings from Death Notification 2020. Available online: https://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/P03093/P030932020.pdf (accessed on 14 March 2025).
  2. Waddington, H.S.; Masset, E.; Bick, S.; Cairncross, S. Impact on childhood mortality of interventions to improve drinking water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) to households: Systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS Med. 2023, 20, e1004215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Ray, S.K.; Amarchand, R.; Srikanth, J.; Majumdar, K.K. A Study on Prevalence of Bacteria in the Hands of Children and Their Perception on Hand Washing in Two Schools of Bangalore and Kolkata. Indian J. Public Health 2011, 55, 293–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Wilson, A.M.; Verhougstraete, M.P.; Beamer, P.I.; King, M.F.; Reynolds, K.A.; Gerba, C.P. Frequency of hand-to-head, -mouth, -eyes, and -nose contacts for adults and children during eating and non-eating macro-activities. J. Expo. Sci. Environ. Epidemiol. 2021, 31, 34–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Sittikul, P.; Sriburin, P.; Rattanamahaphoom, J.; Nuprasert, W.; Thammasonthijarern, N.; Thaipadungpanit, J.; Hattasingh, W.; Kosoltanapiwat, N.; Puthavathana, P.; Chatchen, S. Stability and infectivity of enteroviruses on dry surfaces: Potential for indirect transmission control. Biosaf. Health 2023, 5, 339–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. George, C.M.; Cirhuza, L.B.; Kuhl, J.; Williams, C.; Coglianese, N.; Thomas, E.; Bauler, S.; François, R.; Saxton, R.; Presence, A.S.; et al. Child Mouthing of Feces and Fomites and Animal Contact are Associated with Diarrhea and Impaired Growth Among Young Children in the Democratic Republic of the Congo: A Prospective Cohort Study. J. Pediatr. 2021, 228, 110–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Edmonds-Wilson, S.L.; Nurinova, N.I.; Zapka, C.A.; Fierer, N.; Wilson, M. Review of human hand microbiome research. J. Dermatol. Sci. 2015, 80, 3–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Clough, S. Gender and the hygiene hypothesis. Soc. Sci. Med. 2011, 72, 486–493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Ejemot-Nwadiaro, R.I.; Ehiri, J.E.; Arikpo, D.; Meremikwu, M.M.; Critchley, J.A. Hand-washing promotion for preventing diarrhoea. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2021, 2021, CD004265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Freeman, M.C.; Stocks, M.E.; Cumming, O.; Jeandron, A.; Higgins, J.P.T.; Wolf, J.; Prüss-Ustün, A.; Bonjour, S.; Hunter, P.R.; Fewtrell, L.; et al. Systematic review: Hygiene and health: Systematic review of handwashing practices worldwide and update of health effects. Trop. Med. Int. Health 2014, 19, 906–916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Chen, X.; Ran, L.; Liu, Q.; Hu, Q.; Du, X.; Tan, X. Hand hygiene, mask-wearing behaviors and its associated factors during the COVID-19 epidemic: A cross-sectional study among primary school students in Wuhan, China. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2893. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Savolainen-Kopra, C.; Haapakoski, J.; A Peltola, P.; Ziegler, T.; Korpela, T.; Anttila, P.; Amiryousefi, A.; Huovinen, P.; Huvinen, M.; Noronen, H.; et al. Hand washing with soap and water together with behavioural recommendations prevents infections in common work environment: An open cluster-randomized trial. Trials 2012, 13, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Stangerup, M.; Hansen, M.B.; Hansen, R.; Sode, L.P.; Hesselbo, B.; Kostadinov, K.; Olesen, B.S.; Calum, H. Hand hygiene compliance of healthcare workers before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: A long-term follow-up study. Am. J. Infect. Control 2021, 49, 1118–1122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Ragusa, R.; Marranzano, M.; Lombardo, A.; Quattrocchi, R.; Bellia, M.A.; Lupo, L. Has the covid 19 virus changed adherence to hand washing among healthcare workers? Behav. Sci. 2021, 11, 53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Wolf, J.; Hubbard, S.; Brauer, M.; Ambelu, A.; Arnold, B.F.; Bain, R.; Bauza, V.; Brown, J.; A Caruso, B.; Clasen, T.; et al. Effectiveness of interventions to improve drinking water, sanitation, and handwashing with soap on risk of diarrhoeal disease in children in low-income and middle-income settings: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet 2022, 400, 48–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Kim, D.; Lee, O. Effects of Audio-Visual Stimulation on Hand Hygiene Compliance among Family and Non-Family Visitors of Pediatric Wards: A Quasi-Experimental Pre-post Intervention Study. J. Pediatr. Nurs. 2019, 46, e92–e97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Liu, X.; Hou, W.; Zhao, Z.; Cheng, J.; van Beeck, E.F.; Peng, X.; Jones, K.; Fu, X.; Zhou, Y.; Zhang, Z.; et al. A hand hygiene intervention to decrease hand, foot and mouth disease and absence due to sickness among kindergarteners in China: A cluster-randomized controlled trial. J. Infect. 2019, 78, 19–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Watson, J.; Amon-Tanoh, M.A.; Deola, C.; Haji, M.A.; Sheikh, M.R.; Mohamud, F.A.; Ali, S.Y.; MacDougall, A.; Cumming, O. Effect of a novel hygiene intervention on older children’s handwashing in a humanitarian setting in Kahda district, Somalia: A cluster-randomised controlled equivalence trial. Int. J. Hyg. Environ. Health 2023, 250, 114163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Cantrell, M.E.; Sylvestre, É.; Wharton, H.C.; Scheidegger, R.; Curchod, L.; Gute, D.M.; Griffiths, J.; Julian, T.R.; Pickering, A.J. Hands Are Frequently Contaminated with Fecal Bacteria and Enteric Pathogens Globally: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. ACS Environ. Au 2023, 3, 123–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. StatsSA. The State of Basic Service Delivery in South Africa: Analysis of the Census 2022. Available online: https://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/Report-03-01-83/Report-03-01-832022.pdf (accessed on 8 May 2025).
  21. Singh, A.; Barnard, T.G. A possible flow cytometry-based viability and vitality assessment protocol for pathogenic Vibrio cholerae O1 and O139 postexposure to simulated gastric fluid. BioMed Res. Int. 2021, 2021, 5551845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Singh, A.; Yelverton, C.J.; Barnard, T.G. Rapid Quantification of the Total Viable Bacterial Population on Human Hands Using Flow Cytometry with SYBR® Green I. Cytom. B Clin. Cytom. 2019, 96, 397–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Lange, S.L. The Effect of a Simple Intervention on Hand Hygiene Related Diseases in Preschools. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  24. Lange, S.L.; Barnard, T.G.; Naicker, N. Effect of a simple intervention on hand hygiene related diseases in preschools in South Africa: Research protocol for an intervention study. BMJ Open 2019, 9, e030656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Wang, Y.Y.; Hammes, F.; Boon, N.; Chami, M.; Egli, T. Isolation and characterization of low nucleic acid (LNA)-content bacteria. ISME J. 2009, 3, 889–902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Roesel, S.; Grossart, H.P. Contrasting dynamics in activity and com-munity composition of free-living and particle-associated bacteria in spring. Aquat. Microb. Ecol. 2012, 66, 169–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. De Roos, A.J.; Gurian, P.L.; Robinson, L.F.; Rai, A.; Zakeri, I.; Kondo, M.C. Review of epidemiological studies of drinking-water turbidity in relation to acute gastrointestinal Illness. Environ. Health Perspect. 2017, 125, 086003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Staniford, L.J.; Schmidtke, K.A. A systematic review of hand-hygiene and environmental-disinfection interventions in settings with children. BMC Public Health 2020, 20, 195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Lange, S.; Barnard, T.G.; Naicker, N. The effect of a hand hygiene intervention on the behaviour, practices and health of parents of preschool children in South Africa. Perspect. Public Health 2022, 142, 338–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. De Alwis, W.R.; Pakirisamy, P.; San, L.W.; Xiaofen, E.C. A Study on Hand Contamination and Hand Washing Practices among Medical Students. ISRN Public Health 2012, 2012, 251483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Pickering, A.J.; Julian, T.R.; Mamuya, S.; Boehm, A.B.; Davis, J. Bacterial hand contamination among Tanzanian mothers varies temporally and following household activities. Trop. Med. Int. Health 2011, 16, 233–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Rifqi, M.A.; Hamidah, U.; Sintawardani, N.; Harada, H.; Nyambe, S.; Sai, A.; Yamauchi, T. Effect of handwashing on the reduction of Escherichia coli on children’s hands in an urban slum Indonesia. J. Water Health 2023, 21, 1651–1662. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Oyunchimeg, M.; Burmaajav, B.; Enkhjargal, A.; Tsegmed, S.; Suvd, B.; Oyun-Erdene, O.; Zolzaya, D.; Otgonbayar, D.; Oyunchimeg, D.-U.; Azjargal, L.; et al. Soil microbial contamination and its impact on child diarrheal disease incidence in Ulaanbaatar. Geogr. Environ. Sustain. 2019, 12, 243–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Ijerph 22 00846 g001
Figure 1. Flow cytometric dot plots and histogram examples of the distribution of bacterial cells in a hand wash sample, showing the data collection and the gating strategy as described by Singh et al. (2019) [22]. The bacterial population in the hand wash sample is shown (a) before the intervention and (b) after the intervention.
Figure 1. Flow cytometric dot plots and histogram examples of the distribution of bacterial cells in a hand wash sample, showing the data collection and the gating strategy as described by Singh et al. (2019) [22]. The bacterial population in the hand wash sample is shown (a) before the intervention and (b) after the intervention.
Ijerph 22 00846 g001
Ijerph 22 00846 g002
Figure 2. Schematic representation of the hand hygiene intervention.
Figure 2. Schematic representation of the hand hygiene intervention.
Ijerph 22 00846 g002
Ijerph 22 00846 g003
Figure 3. Whisker-box plot comparing the pre-intervention total bacterial and live (intact) microbial cell counts for the right and left hands.
Figure 3. Whisker-box plot comparing the pre-intervention total bacterial and live (intact) microbial cell counts for the right and left hands.
Ijerph 22 00846 g003
Ijerph 22 00846 g004
Figure 4. Whisker-box plot of the results obtained post-intervention by flow cytometry.
Figure 4. Whisker-box plot of the results obtained post-intervention by flow cytometry.
Ijerph 22 00846 g004
Table 1. Pre-intervention total bacterial and intact live cell count for both hands per gender.
Table 1. Pre-intervention total bacterial and intact live cell count for both hands per gender.
GenderNo.Total Cell Count/70 mL (RH)Intact Live Cells/70 mL (RH)Total Cell Count/70 mL (LH)Intact Live Cells/70 mL (LH)
Male81 (51.0%)2.14 × 1061.39 × 1061.99 × 1061.25 × 106
Female79 (49.0%)2.63 × 1061.59 × 1062.46 × 1061.51 × 106
Table 2. Pre- and post-intervention bag-wash results.
Table 2. Pre- and post-intervention bag-wash results.
Pre-InterventionPre-Intervention MalePre-Intervention FemalePost-InterventionPost-Intervention MalePost-Intervention FemalePre-Intervention MeanPost-Intervention Pre-HW MeanPost-Intervention Post-HW MeanPre-HW with SoapPost-HW with SoapPre-HW No SoapPost-HW No Soap
No. of samples16081 (51.0%)79 (49.0%)14871 (48.0%)77 (52.0%)148 14814898984949
Total bacterial count IG CFU/mL 3.17 × 1063.68 × 106 4.9 × 1074.65 × 1063 × 1084 × 1081 × 1084.6 × 1081.1 × 1086.0 × 1081.3 × 108
Total bacterial count CG CFU/mL 2.74 × 1063.29 × 106 4.53 × 1064.35 × 1063 × 1084 × 1088 × 1074.0 × 1087.0 x 1074.6 × 1089.2 × 107
Intact live cells CFU/mL 2 × 1081.2 × 1087.0 × 1061.2 × 1086.8 × 1061.2 × 1087.4 × 106
Intact live cells IG CFU/mL 2.09 × 1062.48 × 106 1.26 × 1061.26 × 1062 × 1081 × 1087 × 1061.2 × 1087.0 × 1061.2 × 1081.0 × 107
Intact live cells CG CFU/mL 1.57 × 1061.94 × 106 1.24 × 1061.17 × 1061 × 1081 × 1086 × 1061.2 × 1086.0 × 1061.1 × 1087.2 × 106
Turbidity NTU 108.335.4
(p < 0.001)		10233
(p < 0.001)		121.140.3
(p < 0.001)
Turbidity NTU IG 78.227.4
(p < 0.001)		76.426.6
(p < 0.001)		9635.2
(p < 0.001)
Turbidity NTU CG 138.944.3
(p < 0.001)		163.849.1
(p < 0.001)		125.341.1
(p < 0.001)
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Lange, S.; Barnard, T.G.; Naicker, N.; Singh, A. Monitoring the Effectiveness of a Preschool Hand Hygiene Intervention Using Flow Cytometry to Determine the Reduction in the Microbiological Counts. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2025, 22, 846. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph22060846

AMA Style

Lange S, Barnard TG, Naicker N, Singh A. Monitoring the Effectiveness of a Preschool Hand Hygiene Intervention Using Flow Cytometry to Determine the Reduction in the Microbiological Counts. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2025; 22(6):846. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph22060846

Chicago/Turabian Style

Lange, Samantha, Tobias George Barnard, Nisha Naicker, and Atheesha Singh. 2025. "Monitoring the Effectiveness of a Preschool Hand Hygiene Intervention Using Flow Cytometry to Determine the Reduction in the Microbiological Counts" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 22, no. 6: 846. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph22060846

APA Style

Lange, S., Barnard, T. G., Naicker, N., & Singh, A. (2025). Monitoring the Effectiveness of a Preschool Hand Hygiene Intervention Using Flow Cytometry to Determine the Reduction in the Microbiological Counts. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 22(6), 846. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph22060846

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop