Literature DB >> 19321226

Is it really clean? An evaluation of the efficacy of four methods for determining hospital cleanliness.

O Sherlock1, N O'Connell, E Creamer, H Humphreys.   

Abstract

An important component of effective cleaning in hospitals involves monitoring the efficacy of the methods used. Generally the recommended tool for monitoring cleaning efficacy is visual assessments. In this study four methods to determine cleaning efficacy of hospital surfaces were compared, namely visual assessment, chemical (ATP) and microbiological methods, i.e. aerobic colony count (ACC) and the presence of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Respectively, 93.3%, 71.5%, 92.1% and 95.0% of visual, ATP, ACC and MRSA assessments were considered acceptable or 'clean' according to each test standard. Visual assessment alone did not always provide a meaningful measure of surface cleanliness or cleaning efficacy. The average ATP value from 120 swabs before cleaning was 612 relative light units (RLU) (range: 72-2575) and 375 RLU after cleaning (range: 106-1071); the accepted standard is 500 RLU. In a hospital setting with low microbiological counts, the use of chemical tests such as ATP may provide additional information of cleaning efficacy and ATP trends allow identification of environmental surfaces that require additional cleaning or cleaning schedule amendments.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19321226     DOI: 10.1016/j.jhin.2009.02.013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Hosp Infect        ISSN: 0195-6701            Impact factor:   3.926


  36 in total

1.  Swab type, moistening, and preenrichment for Staphylococcus aureus on environmental surfaces.

Authors:  Timothy F Landers; Armando Hoet; Thomas E Wittum
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2010-04-14       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Efficacy and limitations of an ATP-based monitoring system.

Authors:  Danielle E Turner; Erin K Daugherity; Craig Altier; Kirk J Maurer
Journal:  J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 1.232

3.  Individual training for farmers based on results from protein and ATP rapid tests and microbiological conventional cultural methods improves hygiene in pig fattening pens.

Authors:  Céline Heinemann; Isabell Meyer; Franziska T Bögel; Simone M Schmid; Jason J Hayer; Julia Steinhoff-Wagner
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2020-01-01       Impact factor: 3.159

Review 4.  Hospital cleaning in the 21st century.

Authors:  S J Dancer
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2011-04-17       Impact factor: 3.267

5.  Assessment of interplay between UV wavelengths, material surfaces and food residues in open surface hygiene validation.

Authors:  Stephen Abban; Mogens Jakobsen; Lene Jespersen
Journal:  J Food Sci Technol       Date:  2013-01-25       Impact factor: 2.701

6.  Developing a Performance Standard for Adequate Sanitization of Wire-Bar Lids.

Authors:  Linna E Srn; Louise K Hammarberg; Robin J Kastenmayer; Liselotte C Hallengren
Journal:  J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 1.232

7.  CORR Insights®: What Orthopaedic Operating Room Surfaces Are Contaminated With Bioburden? A Study Using the ATP Bioluminescence Assay.

Authors:  William L Hennrikus
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2017-02-22       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  Control of drug-resistant pathogens in endemic settings: contact precautions, controversies, and a proposal for a less restrictive alternative.

Authors:  Gonzalo Bearman; Michael P Stevens
Journal:  Curr Infect Dis Rep       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 3.725

9.  Manzanita wood: a sanitizable enrichment option for nonhuman primates.

Authors:  Kerith R Luchins; Kate C Baker; Margaret H Gilbert; James L Blanchard; Rudolf P Bohm
Journal:  J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 1.232

Review 10.  Controlling hospital-acquired infection: focus on the role of the environment and new technologies for decontamination.

Authors:  Stephanie J Dancer
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 26.132

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.