Refilling the Bottle: Pandemic Anxiety,Hand Sanitizer Overuse,and the Need for Workplace Education

D ear Editor,

I read with great interest the recent study by Kurt and Özdemir Koyu (2026) published in Workplace Health & Safety, titled “Hand Sanitizer Use During the Pandemic: Frequency and Health Effects Among Healthcare and Non-Healthcare Professionals.” The researchers’ findings particularly regarding the incredibly high frequency of hand sanitizer use among non-healthcare professionals and the general lack of public awareness regarding safe sanitizer composition deeply resonated with our experiences working in the Community Development Department at Bukidnon State University during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. This study shines a necessary light on a critical nuance of workplace public health that has been largely overlooked since the global health crisis subsided, illustrating how fear can drive behavioral compliance long before it drives genuine understanding of the issue.

The study highlights that over a third (33.8%) of non-healthcare workers utilized hand sanitizer 10 or more times a day (Kurt & Özdemir Koyu, 2026). In our university office spaces, it often felt like much more than that. Hand sanitization has long been championed as one of the most useful, accessible, and cost-effective ways to prevent the transmission of disease-causing microorganisms in shared public spaces (Suryawanshi et al., 2021). Out of an abundance of caution and a profound fear for our collective safety during those highly uncertain times, our administration implemented mandatory, strict hygiene protocols. We installed a prominent hand sanitizer dispenser directly next to our main entrance door, making it an absolute requirement for every employee, visiting citizen, and official to heavily sanitize their hands before stepping foot inside the workplace.

Looking back, the psychological anxiety of that era was entirely intense throughout our school. Research shows that psychological distress, hyper-vigilance, and clinical anxiety were incredibly common among workers navigating shifting public safety protocols during the outbreak, regardless of whether they worked in healthcare or local government (Narapaka et al., 2024). In our department, this anxiety manifested as a strict, collective fixation on our primary line of physical defense. We were constantly policing the physical content levels of that specific doorstep dispenser. The moment the liquid crept close to the bottom of the bottle, a localized panic would set in among the staff. This would prompt an immediate, urgent request to our administrative supply chain for an instant refill. We truly believed that if that dispenser ran dry, even for a single afternoon, our entire office environment would be immediately compromised and vulnerable to contamination.

Evaluating Kurt and Özdemir Koyu’s (2026) paper from an administrative and field perspective reveals several critical strengths. First, the paper excels by directly comparing healthcare and non-healthcare demographics, effectively demonstrating that occupational settings outside of traditional medical spaces were equally subject to extreme chemical usage protocols. Second, by using regression models to identify specific vulnerability markers, like how the female gender and healthcare professions correlate significantly with higher sanitizer-related skin problems, it provides actionable data for targeted occupational healthcare. Third, the study bravely challenges the “more is better” public health narrative, proving that high behavioral compliance frequently coexists with dangerously low chemical awareness.

However, the paper also presents three clear methodological weaknesses that should be considered when translating these findings into global policies. First, because the data were gathered through a cross-sectional approach, it acts merely as a snapshot in time; it cannot establish definitive causal relationships between the daily frequency of application and long-term dermatological changes. Second, the study relies entirely on self-reported survey data regarding frequency and physical symptoms, exposing the findings to potential recall bias from participants trying to estimate their historic usage. Third, the geographic and sample boundaries are strictly confined to a single central district in Türkiye (N = 305). This narrow geographic focus limits the immediate generalizability of the conclusions to highly diverse demographic and climate landscapes, such as our unique university setting in the tropical environment of Northern Mindanao.

As Kurt and Özdemir Koyu (2026) point out, while compliance with hand hygiene mandates was remarkably high, actual consumer understanding of chemical contents and proper application safety was incredibly low. A mere 12.1% of non-healthcare professionals possessed full knowledge of the actual chemical contents of the sanitizers they were applying to their skin multiple times a day. This showcases a substantial knowledge-to-practice gap, a phenomenon where individuals rigorously execute specific health behaviors without fully understanding the underlying clinical details, active ingredients, or safety guidelines associated with those actions (Bhadoria et al., 2024). We were so intensely focused on the immediate, invisible threat of viral transmission that we rarely, if ever, stopped to read the ingredient labels, check the alcohol percentages, or consider the potential long-term dermatological or systemic health risks of these bulk-purchased chemical products.

This research serves as an important, cautionary reminder that workplace health interventions require a dual approach. It is simply not enough for employers to provide public health tools and strictly enforce their use under the pressure of a crisis. Organizations must also implement targeted, evidence-based education regarding the chemical products we interact with daily (Kurt & Özdemir Koyu, 2026). When policies focus solely on compliance without education, it risks creating an environment of performative safety driven by anxiety rather than informed wellness practices. Building comprehensive workplace hygiene literacy must remain a top priority for healthcare and non-healthcare offices alike. We must ensure our staff is not just compliant, but truly informed, turning anxious habits into sustainable health practices.