Advertisement

Comparative effectiveness of rapid-cycle ultraviolet decontamination to chemical decontamination on high-touch communication devices

Published:April 13, 2019DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2019.02.022

      Background

      This quantitative, comparative-descriptive study of inpatient units in a large military medical center was designed to compare the effectiveness of compact ultraviolet (UV-C) decontamination to standard chemical decontamination in reducing the microbial burden on Vocera (San Jose, CA) communication devices and to characterize changes in staff cleaning practices following UV-C device implementation.

      Methods

      Aerobic and anaerobic swabs were used to collect microbial samples from Vocera devices (n = 60) before and after chemical decontamination (first sampling) and before and after UV decontamination (second sampling). Cleaning behaviors were assessed by observation and oral inquiry during the baseline sampling and surveyed 8 weeks after UV-C device implementation. Outcomes included aerobic and anaerobic colony-forming units and prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, vancomycin-resistant enterococci, or Clostridium difficile, as determined by standard microbiological methods.

      Results

      No differences were found between the two cleaning methods in their ability to reduce aerobic bacteria; however, UV-C was significantly more effective at reducing bacteria grown anaerobically (P < .01). This study elucidated an 8.3% prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus on Vocera devices in the inpatient environment. Initially, 42% of respondents reported deviations from manufacturer's cleaning guidelines, and 16.7% reported daily or more frequent cleaning of the Vocera devices.

      Conclusions

      After implementation, UV-C decontamination reduced average cleaning time by 43% and increased the rate of daily Vocera cleaning to 86.5%. Respondents reported an overall 98% user satisfaction with the UV-C device.

      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 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:

      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

      References

        • Manning ML
        • Davis J
        • Sparnon E
        • Ballard RM
        iPads, droids, and bugs: infection prevention for mobile handheld devices at the point of care.
        Am J Infect Control. 2013; 41: 1073-1076
        • Carling PC
        • Bartley JM
        Evaluating hygienic cleaning in health care settings: what you do not know can harm your patients.
        Am J Infect Control. 2010; 38: S41-S50
        • Chao Foong Y
        • Green M
        • Zargari A
        • et al.
        Mobile phones as a potential vehicle of infection in a hospital setting.
        J Occup Environ Hyg. 2015; 12: D232-D235
        • Boyce JM
        Modern technologies for improving cleaning and disinfection of environmental surfaces in hospitals.
        Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2016; 5: 10
        • Ulger F
        • Dilek A
        • Esen S
        • Sunbul M
        • Leblebicioglu H
        Are healthcare workers’ mobile phones a potential source of nosocomial infections? Review of the literature.
        J Infect Dev Ctries. 2015; 9: 1046-1053
        • Dancer SJ
        Controlling hospital-acquired infection: focus on the role of the environment and new technologies for decontamination.
        Clin Microbiol Rev. 2014; 27: 665-690
        • Ernst AA
        • Weiss SJ
        • Reitsema JA
        Does the addition of Vocera hands-free communication device improve interruptions in an academic emergency department?.
        South Med J. 2013; 106: 189-195
        • Pemmasani V
        • Paget T
        • van Woerden HC
        • Minamareddy P
        • Pemmasani S
        Hands-free communication to free up nursing time.
        Nurs Times. 2014; 110: 12-14
        • Sehulster L
        • Chinn RY
        • CDC
        • HICPAC
        Guidelines for environmental infection control in health-care facilities. recommendations of CDC and the Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC).
        MMWR Recomm Rep. 2003; 52: 1-42
        • Petersson LP
        • Albrecht UV
        • Sedlacek L
        • Gemein S
        • Gebel J
        • Vonberg RP
        Portable UV light as an alternative for decontamination.
        Am J Infect Control. 2014; 42: 1334-1336
        • Quinn MM
        • Henneberger PK
        • Braun B
        • Delclos GL
        • et al.
        • National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)
        • National Occupational Research Agenda (NORA) Cleaning and Disinfecting in Healthcare Working Group
        Cleaning and disinfecting environmental surfaces in health care: toward an integrated framework for infection and occupational illness prevention.
        Am J Infect Control. 2015; 43: 424-434
        • Vianna PG
        • Dale Jr, CR
        • Simmons S
        • Stibich M
        • Licitra CM
        Impact of pulsed xenon ultraviolet light on hospital-acquired infection rates in a community hospital.
        Am J Infect Control. 2016; 44: 299-303
        • Haas JP
        • Menz J
        • Dusza S
        • Montecalvo MA
        Implementation and impact of ultraviolet environmental disinfection in an acute care setting.
        Am J Infect Control. 2014; 42: 586-590
        • Mathew JI
        • Cadnum JL
        • Sankar T
        • Jencson AL
        • Kundrapu S
        • Donskey CJ
        Evaluation of an enclosed ultraviolet-C radiation device for decontamination of mobile handheld devices.
        Am J Infect Control. 2016; 44: 724-726
        • Koenig JC
        • Groissmeier KD
        • Manefield MJ
        Tolerance of anaerobic bacteria to chlorinated solvents.
        Microbes Environ. 2014; 29: 23-30
        • McKay G
        • Nguyen D
        Antibiotic resistance and tolerance in bacterial biofilms.
        in: Gotte M Berghuis A Matlashewski G Wainberg M Sheppard D Handbook of antimicrobial resistance. Springer, New YorkNY2014: 1-24
        • Charlebois A
        • Jacques M
        • Boulianne M
        • Archambault M
        Tolerance of clostridium perfringens biofilms to disinfectants commonly used in the food industry.
        Food Microbiol. 2017; 62: 32-38
        • Nerandzic MM
        • Thota P
        • Sankar CT
        • et al.
        Evaluation of a pulsed xenon ultraviolet disinfection system for reduction of healthcare-associated pathogens in hospital rooms.
        Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2015; 36: 192-197
        • Hu H
        • Johani K
        • Gosbell IB
        • et al.
        Intensive care unit environmental surfaces are contaminated by multidrug-resistant bacteria in biofilms: combined results of conventional culture, pyrosequencing, scanning electron microscopy, and confocal laser microscopy.
        J Hosp Infect. 2015; 91: 35-44
        • Burmolle M
        • Webb JS
        • Rao D
        • Hansen LH
        • Sorensen SJ
        • Kjelleberg S
        Enhanced biofilm formation and increased resistance to antimicrobial agents and bacterial invasion are caused by synergistic interactions in multispecies biofilms.
        Appl Environ Microbiol. 2006; 72: 3916-3923
        • Pidot SJ
        • Gao W
        • Buultjens AH
        • et al.
        Increasing tolerance of hospital enterococcus faecium to handwash alcohols.
        Sci Transl Med. 2018; 10 (pii: eaar6115)