Monitoring the effectiveness of cleaning in four British hospitals


      A survey of cleaning effectiveness was conducted in two wards in four acute hospitals in England and Wales. Surfaces were monitored immediately before and after cleaning on three separate occasions using visual assessment, adenosine triphosphate (ATP) bioluminescence, expressed in relative light units (RLUs), and microbiological methods (aerobic colony counts [ACC]), expressed in colony forming units (cfu) per cm2.


      Comparison of data from a total of over 3000 assessments showed highly significant differences in failure rates between visual assessment and either ATP or microbiological counts. There was no significant difference in failure rates between ATP and microbiological counts. Using visual assessment, failure rates were significantly lower after cleaning than before. Using ATP or microbiological methods, failure rates were not significantly different after cleaning.


      Data obtained using both ATP and ACC, indicated considerable variability after cleaning and that failed surfaces were often well in excess of benchmark values.


      Cumulatively, the results indicate that visual assessment is not a reliable indicator of surface cleanliness or of cleaning efficacy. Concerns also arise about the standards of surface cleanliness achieved after cleaning in the hospitals.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to American Journal of Infection Control
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


      1. Commission for Healthcare and Audit Inspection in England. Snapshot of Hospital Cleanliness 2005.

      2. O'Brian A. Hospital cleaning to get standardised audits: move to monitor privatized housekeeping sparked by concern over infections 2005. Available from: Accessed November 8, 2006.

      3. National Audit Office Wales. The management and delivery of hospital cleaning services in Wales. May 2003.

      4. Health service executive report on a national acute hospitals hygiene audit undertaken on behalf of the national hospitals office 2005. Available from:,2618,en.pdf. Accessed November 8, 2006.

      5. Unison. Hospital contract cleaning and infection control 2005. Available from: Accessed November 8, 2006.

      6. Department of Health. Revised guidelines on contracting for cleaning. NHS Estates, reference 4217; 2004. Available from: Accessed November 8, 2006.

      7. Department of Health. Towards cleaner hospitals and lower rates of infection: a summary of action; 2004. Available from: Accessed November 8, 2006.

        • Dancer S.J.
        How do we assess hospital cleaning? A proposal for microbiological standards for surface hygiene in hospitals.
        J Hosp Infect. 2004; 56: 10-15
        • Griffith C.J.
        Monitoring the effectiveness of cleaning: detection and sampling.
        in: Lelieveld Mostert Holah White Improving hygiene in the food industry. Woodhead Publishing Ltd, Cambridge (UK)2005
      8. BS EN 13549 Cleaning services. Basic requirements and recommendations for quality measuring systems 2001.

        • Malik R.E.
        • Cooper R.A.
        • Griffith C.J.
        The use of audit tools to evaluate the efficacy of cleaning systems in hospitals.
        Am J Infect Control. 2002; 31: 181-187
        • Griffith C.J.
        • Cooper R.A.
        • Gilmore J.
        • Davies C.
        • Lewis M.
        An evaluation of hospital cleaning regimes and standards.
        J Hosp Infect. 2000; 45: 19-28
        • Griffith C.J.
        • Malik R.E.
        • Cooper R.A.
        • Looker N.
        • Michaels B.
        Environmental surface cleanliness and the potential for contamination during handwashing.
        Am J Infect Control. 2003; 31: 93-96
      9. Redmond EC, Griffith CJ. Evaluation of consumer food safety education initiatives in the UK and determination of effective strategies for food safety risk communication. A report for the Food Standards Agency, London 2005.

      10. Swedish Food Agency. The Swedish Statute Book 1998; SLV SFS, 10.

      11. Cleanzine. Available from: Accessed November 8, 2006.

      12. Biotrace. Clean-Trace User Guide: Cooked meat. Accessed November 8, 2006. Available from:

        • Dillon M.
        • Griffith C.J.
        How to clean: a management guide. MD Associates.
        Humberside. 1999;
      13. NHS Scotland. Managing the risk of healthcare associated infection in NHS Scotland. Report of a Joint Scottish Executive Health Department and NHS Scotland Working Group, April 2001. Available from: Accessed November 8, 2006.

        • Hirai Y.
        Survival of bacteria under dry conditions, from a viewpoint of nosocomial infections.
        J Hosp Infect. 1991; 19: 191-200
        • Lewis T.
        • Gallo M.
        • Weinbren M.
        • Griffith C.J.
        An assessment of the effectiveness of modified hospital cleaning protocols using visual, ATP bioluminescence, and microbiological analysis.
        J Hosp Infect. 2006; 64: 55-56