Advertisement

A back table ultraviolet light decreases environmental contamination during operative cases

Published:October 02, 2021DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajic.2021.09.020

      Highlights

      • UV-LED has recently been introduced as a potential alternative to traditional UV light.
      • Germicidal UV-LED may decrease environmental contamination near the operative field.
      • This technology has the potential to decrease periprosthetic joint infection.

      Background

      The purpose of this study is to assess the impact of a germicidal ultraviolet light-emitting diode (LED) on the contamination level of a back table in the operating room (OR) during total joint arthroplasty procedures.

      Methods

      Eight Tryptic Soy Agar petri plates were placed on a table located near the operative field and exposed to air. One plate was removed on the hour over an 8-hour time span. The back table had either an UV-LED for disinfection or a sham UV-LED. This process was repeated in 12 different ORs (6 with UV light, 6 with sham device). The plates were then incubated for 48 hours at 36°C ± 1°C . Colony forming units (CFU) were recorded 24 and 48 hours after incubation.

      Results

      There was a statistically significant difference in total CFUs between the intervention vs sham at 24-hours (27 vs 95, P = .0001) and 48-hours (38 vs 122, P < .0001). The multivariate analysis revealed that the 24-hour and 48-hour count, the predictors UV light (P = .002) and hour of plate removal (P = .050) were statistically significantly associated with CFU counts. Together, the predictor variables explained 15.8% and 23.0% of the variance in CFU counts at 24- and 48-hours, respectively.

      Conclusions

      A back table UV-LED may decrease environmental contamination near the operative field. This has potential to lead to a decrease in joint infection.

      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

        • Weiser MC
        • Moucha CS.
        Operating-room airflow technology and infection prevention.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am Vol. 2018; 100: 795-804
        • Hanselman AE
        • Montague MD
        • Murphy TR
        • Dietz MJ.
        Contamination relative to the activation timing of filtered-exhaust helmets.
        J Arthroplasty. 2016; 31: 776-780
        • Curtis GL
        • Faour M
        • Jawad M
        • Klika AK
        • Barsoum WK
        • Higuera CA.
        Reduction of particles in the operating room using ultraviolet air disinfection and recirculation units.
        J Arthroplasty. 2018; 33: S196-S200
        • Fornwalt L
        • Ennis D
        • Stibich M.
        Influence of a total joint infection control bundle on surgical site infection rates.
        Am J Infect Control. 2016; 44: 239-241
        • Evans RP.
        Current concepts for clean air and total joint arthroplasty: laminar airflow and ultraviolet radiation: a systematic review.
        Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011; 469: 945-953
        • Young SW
        • Zhu M
        • Shirley OC
        • Wu Q
        • Spangehl MJ.
        Do “Surgical Helmet Systems” or “Body Exhaust Suits” affect contamination and deep infection rates in arthroplasty? A systematic review.
        J Arthroplasty. 2016; 31: 225-233
        • Aalirezaie A
        • Akkaya M
        • Barnes CL
        • et al.
        General assembly, prevention, operating room environment: proceedings of international consensus on orthopedic infections.
        J Arthroplasty. 2019; 34: S105-SS15
        • Jinadatha C
        • Villamaria FC
        • Restrepo MI
        • et al.
        Is the pulsed xenon ultraviolet light no-touch disinfection system effective on methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in the absence of manual cleaning?.
        Am J Infect Control. 2015; 43: 878-881
        • Nerandzic M
        • Thota P
        • Sankar T
        • 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
        • Ibrahim MA
        • MacAdam J
        • Autin O
        • Jefferson B.
        Evaluating the impact of LED bulb development on the economic viability of ultraviolet technology for disinfection.
        Environ Technol. 2014; 35: 400-406
        • Song K
        • Mohseni M
        • Taghipour F.
        Application of ultraviolet light-emitting diodes (UV-LEDs) for water disinfection: a review.
        Water Res. 2016; 94: 341-349
        • Song K
        • Mohseni M
        • Taghipour F.
        Mechanisms investigation on bacterial inactivation through combinations of UV wavelengths.
        Water Res. 2019; 163114875
        • Messina G
        • Fattorini M
        • Nante N
        • et al.
        Time effectiveness of Ultraviolet C Light (UVC) emitted by Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs) in reducing stethoscope contamination.
        Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2016; 13: 940
        • Messina G
        • Burgassi S
        • Messina D
        • Montagnani V
        • Cevenini G
        A new UV-LED device for automatic disinfection of stethoscope membranes.
        Am J Infect Control. 2015; 43: e61-e66
        • Hart D.
        Bactericidal ultraviolet radiation in the operating room. Twenty-nine-year study for control of infections.
        J Am Med Assoc. 1960; 172: 1019-1028
        • Ritter MA
        • Olberding EM
        • Malinzak RA.
        Ultraviolet lighting during orthopaedic surgery and the rate of infection.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am Vol. 2007; 89: 1935-1940