American Journal of Microbiological Research
ISSN (Print): 2328-4129 ISSN (Online): 2328-4137 Website: https://www.sciepub.com/journal/ajmr Editor-in-chief: Apply for this position
Open Access
Journal Browser
Go
American Journal of Microbiological Research. 2014, 2(6), 178-181
DOI: 10.12691/ajmr-2-6-3
Open AccessArticle

Antibacterial Activities of Some Medicated Soaps on Selected Human Pathogens

OBI. C. N.1,

1Department of Microbiology, College Of Natural Sciences, Michael Okpara University of Agriculture, Umudike, P. M. B. 7267, Umuahia, Abia State, Nigeria

Pub. Date: November 04, 2014

Cite this paper:
OBI. C. N.. Antibacterial Activities of Some Medicated Soaps on Selected Human Pathogens. American Journal of Microbiological Research. 2014; 2(6):178-181. doi: 10.12691/ajmr-2-6-3

Abstract

Twelve medicated soaps: Crusader, Septol, Carat, 14 days, Funbact, Lifebouy, Safeguard, Tetmosol, TCP, Dettol, Delta and Antigal were investigated for their antibacterial activities against Staphylococcus aureus and Escherichia coli. Two cloth washing soaps (Key and Truck) were used as control. Identification of the bacterial species was by standard microbiological techniques which included colonial examination, Gram staining and biochemical testing. Minimum inhibitory and minimum bactericidal activities of the soaps were determined by disc-agar diffusion method. Profloxacin was employed as a positive control antibiotic. Crusader soap had the highest antibacterial activity (25 mm, against Staphylococcus aureus) while Antigal exhibited the least zone of inhibition (9 mm against Staphylococcus aureus). Significant differences (P<0.05) were observed on the different concentrations of soap preparations used in the work. Staphylococcus aureus was very sensitive to most of the antibacterial soaps used, while Escherichia coli showed higher resistance to the soaps. The medicated soaps analysed have bacteriostatic and bacteriocidal effects on the test pathogens while complete resistance was shown by some of the test isolates even at higher concentrations of the soap preparations used. The cloth washing soaps had no antibacterial effect on the tested pathogens. The use of medicated soaps is thus recommended in homes, schools, offices and hospitals as a way of minimizing or stopping infections that are hitherto spread through the hands.

Keywords:
bacteria infections medicated soaps resistance sensitivity

Creative CommonsThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

References:

[1]  Bauer, A.W, Kirby, W.M, Sherris, J.C and Jurck, M (1966). Antibiotic susceptibility testing by a standard single disc method. American Journal Clinical Pathology. 451: 493-496
 
[2]  Bhargava, H.N and Leonard, P.A (1996). Triclosan, application and safety. American journal of infection control 24: 209-18.
 
[3]  Cheesbrough M (2005). District laboratory practice in tropical countries, part 2. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. pp159-162.
 
[4]  Feroze, K., Elsayed, A and Tarek, T. A (2014) Antimicrobial activity of commercial “antibacterial” handwashes and soaps. Indian Dermatol Online J. 5 (3): 344-346.
 
[5]  Fluit, A.C., Schmits, F. J and Verhoef, J (2001). Frequency and isolation of pathogens from blood stream nosocomial pneumonia, skin and soft tissue, and urinary European. Journal of microbiology infection 20: 188-191.
 
[6]  Friedman, M and Wolf, R (1996). Chemistry of soaps and detergents various types of commercial products and their ingredient. Clinical dermatology 14: 7-13.
 
[7]  Higaki, S., Kitagawa, T., kagoura, M., Morohashi, M and Yamagishi T (2000).Predominant Staphylococcus aureus isolated from various skin disease. Journal of International Medical Research 28 : 87-190.
 
[8]  Johnson, S.A., Goddard, P.A., Ilife,C.. Timmens, B., Richard., A.H., Robson, G and Handley, P.S (2002). Comparative susceptibility of resident and transient hand bacteria to para-chlorometa-xylenol and triclosan. Journal of Applied Microbiology. 93: 336-344
 
[9]  Kimel, L.S (1996). Hand washing education can decreases illness absenteeism. Journal of School Nursery. 12: 14-18.
 
[10]  Larson, E,. McGinley, K., Grove, G.L., Leyden. J.J and Talbot, G.H (1989). Physiologic, microbiologic and seasonal effects of hand washing on the skin of health care personnel. American Journal of Infection control 14: 5-90.
 
[11]  Ndukwe, I.G., Ampitan, J.O., and Isha, Y. (2005) Phytochemical and antimicrobial screening of crude extracts from the root stem bark and leaves Vitellaria paradoxa African Journal of Micro Biology 6 (16): 1905-1909.
 
[12]  Nwambete, K.D and Lyombe, F (2011).Antimicrobial activity of medicated soaps commonly used by Dares Salam residents in Tanzania. Indian Journal of Pharmaceutical sciences 73(1): 92-98.
 
[13]  Osborne, R.C and Grube, J (1982). Hand disinfection in dental practice, Journal of Clinical Preview. Dent 4:11-15.
 
[14]  Poole, K (2002). Mechanisms of bacterial bioade and antibiotic resistance. Journal of Applied Microbiology. 92: 555-564.
 
[15]  Rama Bhat P., Prajna, P.S., Vinita Preethi Menezez and Pavithra Shettuy (2011): Anitmicrobial activities of soaps and detergent. Advances in Biotechnology Research
 
[16]  Richards, M.J, Edwards,J.E., Culver, D.H and Gaynes, R.P (1999). Nosocomial infections in medical intensive care units in the United States. National Nosocomial infections surveillance system. Critical Care Medicine journal 27. 887-892.
 
[17]  Saba Riaz, Adeel Ahmad and Shahida Hasnain. (2009). Antibacterial activity of soaps against daily encountered bacterial. African Journal of Biotechnology 8 (8): 1431-1436.
 
[18]  Selvamohan,, V and Sandhya, T. (2012). Studies on the bactericidal activity of different soaps against bacterial strains. Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology Research (5): 646-650
 
[19]  Whitehouse station (NJ): Merck and Co. Inc., (2008): The Merck Veterinary manual-Tropical antifungal agent. Assessable at, www. Merckvetmanual. Com.
 
[20]  White, D.G and McDermolt, P.F ((2001). Biocides, drug resistance and microbial evolution; Current Opinion in Microbiology; 4: 313-317.