Background
Nosocomial infections are a serious problem in health care facilities. Bacteria can
be transferred from patient to patient via contaminated reusable medical devices and
equipment.
Methods
An anesthesia machine and objects representative of smooth and ridged machine knobs
were contaminated with Staphylococcus aureus, Bacillus atrophaeus spores, and Clostridium sporogenes spores. The ability of 5 commercially available cleaning-disinfecting wipes to remove
bacteria was compared with gauze soaked with water or bleach. Gauze soaked with water
was used to determine the optimal wetness for bacteria removal, which was then used
to evaluate the efficacy of the wipe ingredients.
Results
All of the wipes cleaned the device surfaces significantly better than the no wipe
control. Some wipes performed equally well as gauze with water, whereas others performed
worse. Overall, the wipe containing sodium hypochlorite was the most effective at
removing bacteria. When the wipe ingredients were re-evaluated using the determined
optimal wipe wetness on gauze, their effectiveness at cleaning S aureus, but not spores, significantly improved.
Conclusion
Physically removing bacteria from device surfaces with water was often as effective
as the cleaning-disinfecting wipes. Of the wipe active ingredients evaluated, sodium
hypochlorite was the most effective overall. The wetness of the wipes may also play
a role in their effectiveness.
Key Words
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 accessOne-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:
Subscribe to American Journal of Infection ControlAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Measurement of the costs of hospital infection by prevalence surveys.J Hosp Infect. 1991; 18: 65-72
- Direct costs associated with a nosocomial outbreak of Salmonella infection: an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.Am J Infect Control. 2000; 28: 54-57
- Socioeconomic burden of nosocomial infections.Indian J Med Sci. 2003; 57: 450-456
- Outbreak of multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa in an intensive care unit.J Hosp Infect. 2011; 78: 152-159
- An outbreak of multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection associated with contamination of bronchoscopes and an endoscope washer-disinfector.J Hosp Infect. 2000; 46: 23-30
- Nosocomial outbreak of Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections related to a flexible bronchoscope.J Hosp Infect. 2006; 64: 129-135
- Risk factors for the isolation of multi-drug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii and Pseudomonas aeruginosa: a systematic review of the literature.J Hosp Infect. 2006; 64: 7-15
- An outbreak of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis among hospitalized patients with the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome.N Engl J Med. 1992; 326: 1514-1521
- Investigation of an outbreak of multi-drug resistant Acinetobacter baumannii in an intensive care burns unit.J Hosp Infect. 2001; 48: 228-232
- Effectiveness of contact isolation during a hospital outbreak of methicillin-resistant Staphylcoccus aureus.Am J Epidemiol. 1994; 143: 496-504
- Prospective study of infection, colonization and carriage of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in an outbreak affecting 990 patients.Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 1994; 13: 74-81
- Antimicrobial resistance trends and outbreak frequency in United States hospitals.Clin Infect Dis. 2004; 38: 78-85
- Chemical disinfection and antisepsis in the hospital.J Hosp Res. 1957; 9: 5-31
- Disinfection and sterilization in health care facilities: what clinicians need to know.Clin Infect Dis. 2004; 39: 702-709
- Contamination, disinfection, and cross-colonization: are hospital surfaces reservoirs for nosocomial infections?.Clin Infect Dis. 2004; 39: 1182-1189
- Reduction in acquisition of vancomycin-resistant enterococcus after enforcement of routine environmental cleaning measures.Clin Infect Dis. 2006; 42: 1552-1560
- Measuring the effect of enhanced cleaning in a UK hospital: a prospective cross-over study.BMC Med. 2009; 7: 28
- Efficacy of “sporicidal” wipes against Clostridium difficile.Am J Infect Control. 2011; 39: 212-218
- Cleaning assessment of disinfectant cleaning wipes on an external surface of a medical device contaminated with artificial blood or Streptococcus pneumoniae.Am J Infect Control. 2013; 41: 901-907
- Clinical and molecular epidemiology of sporadic and clustered cases of nosocomial Clostridium difficile diarrhea.Am J Med. 1996; 100: 32-40
- Antibiotic-associated diarrhea.N Engl J Med. 2002; 346: 334-339
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Emergency preparedness and response: bioterrorism agents/diseases. Available from: http://www.bt.cdc.gov/agent/agentlist-category.asp. Accessed October 31, 2014.
- How long do nosocomial pathogens persist on inanimate surfaces? A systematic review.BMC Infect Dis. 2006; 6: 130
- Worst-case soiling levels for patient-used flexible endoscopes before and after cleaning.Am J Infect Control. 1999; 27: 392-401
- Public health notification from FDA, CDC, EPA and OSHA: avoiding hazards with using cleaners and disinfectants on electronic medical equipment.2007 (Available from:) (Accessed October 31, 2014)
Article info
Footnotes
Funding/Support: This work was supported in part by an appointment to the Research Participation Program at the Center for Devices and Radiological Health administered by the Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education through an interagency agreement between the U.S. Department of Energy and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's Medical Countermeasures Initiative.
Disclaimer: Because of limitations in publication length, some data were not included in the manuscript. The data are available on direct request from the corresponding author. The mention of commercial products, their sources, or their use in connection with material reported herein is not to be construed as either an actual or implied endorsement of such products by the Department of Health and Human Services. The findings and conclusions in this article have not been formally disseminated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and should not be construed to represent any agency determination or policy.
Conflicts of Interest: None to report.
Identification
Copyright
Published by Elsevier Inc.
