John M Boyce1, Nancy L Havill, Brent A Moore. 1. Department of Medicine, Hospital of Saint Raphael, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut 06511, USA. jboyce@srhs.org
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the ability of a mobile UV light unit to reduce bacterial contamination of environmental surfaces in patient rooms. METHODS: An automated mobile UV light unit that emits UV-C light was placed in 25 patient rooms after patient discharge and operated using a 1- or 2-stage procedure. Aerobic colony counts were calculated for each of 5 standardized high-touch surfaces in the rooms before and after UV light decontamination (UVLD). Clostridium difficile spore log reductions achieved were determined using a modification of the ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials) International E2197 quantitative disk carrier test method. In-room ozone concentrations during UVLD were measured. RESULTS: For the 1-stage procedure, mean aerobic colony counts for the 5 high-touch surfaces ranged from 10.6 to 98.2 colony-forming units (CFUs) per Dey/Engley (D/E) plate before UVLD and from 0.3 to 24.0 CFUs per D/E plate after UVLD, with significant reductions for all 5 surfaces (all [Formula: see text]). Surfaces in direct line of sight were significantly more likely to yield negative culture results after UVLD than before UVLD (all [Formula: see text]). Mean C. difficile spore log reductions ranged from 1.8 to 2.9. UVLD cycle times ranged from 34.2 to 100.1 minutes. For the 2-stage procedure, mean aerobic colony counts ranged from 10.0 to 89.2 CFUs per D/E plate before UVLD and were 0 CFUs per D/E plate after UVLD, with significant reductions for all 5 high-touch surfaces. UVLD cycle times ranged from 72.1 to 146.3 minutes. In-room ozone concentrations during UVLD ranged from undetectable to 0.012 ppm. CONCLUSIONS: The mobile UV-C light unit significantly reduced aerobic colony counts and C. difficile spores on contaminated surfaces in patient rooms.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the ability of a mobile UV light unit to reduce bacterial contamination of environmental surfaces in patient rooms. METHODS: An automated mobile UV light unit that emits UV-C light was placed in 25 patient rooms after patient discharge and operated using a 1- or 2-stage procedure. Aerobic colony counts were calculated for each of 5 standardized high-touch surfaces in the rooms before and after UV light decontamination (UVLD). Clostridium difficile spore log reductions achieved were determined using a modification of the ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials) International E2197 quantitative disk carrier test method. In-room ozone concentrations during UVLD were measured. RESULTS: For the 1-stage procedure, mean aerobic colony counts for the 5 high-touch surfaces ranged from 10.6 to 98.2 colony-forming units (CFUs) per Dey/Engley (D/E) plate before UVLD and from 0.3 to 24.0 CFUs per D/E plate after UVLD, with significant reductions for all 5 surfaces (all [Formula: see text]). Surfaces in direct line of sight were significantly more likely to yield negative culture results after UVLD than before UVLD (all [Formula: see text]). Mean C. difficile spore log reductions ranged from 1.8 to 2.9. UVLD cycle times ranged from 34.2 to 100.1 minutes. For the 2-stage procedure, mean aerobic colony counts ranged from 10.0 to 89.2 CFUs per D/E plate before UVLD and were 0 CFUs per D/E plate after UVLD, with significant reductions for all 5 high-touch surfaces. UVLD cycle times ranged from 72.1 to 146.3 minutes. In-room ozone concentrations during UVLD ranged from undetectable to 0.012 ppm. CONCLUSIONS: The mobile UV-C light unit significantly reduced aerobic colony counts and C. difficile spores on contaminated surfaces in patient rooms.
Authors: Roy F Chemaly; Sarah Simmons; Charles Dale; Shashank S Ghantoji; Maria Rodriguez; Julie Gubb; Julie Stachowiak; Mark Stibich Journal: Ther Adv Infect Dis Date: 2014-06
Authors: Deverick J Anderson; Luke F Chen; David J Weber; Rebekah W Moehring; Sarah S Lewis; Patricia F Triplett; Michael Blocker; Paul Becherer; J Conrad Schwab; Lauren P Knelson; Yuliya Lokhnygina; William A Rutala; Hajime Kanamori; Maria F Gergen; Daniel J Sexton Journal: Lancet Date: 2017-01-17 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Angela R Lemons; Tia L McClelland; Stephen B Martin; William G Lindsley; Brett J Green Journal: J Hosp Infect Date: 2020-04-10 Impact factor: 3.926
Authors: Jennifer H Han; Nancy Sullivan; Brian F Leas; David A Pegues; Janice L Kaczmarek; Craig A Umscheid Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2015-08-11 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Deverick J Anderson; Maria F Gergen; Emily Smathers; Daniel J Sexton; Luke F Chen; David J Weber; William A Rutala Journal: Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol Date: 2013-05 Impact factor: 3.254
Authors: Chetan Jinadatha; Ricardo Quezada; Thomas W Huber; Jason B Williams; John E Zeber; Laurel A Copeland Journal: BMC Infect Dis Date: 2014-04-07 Impact factor: 3.090
Authors: John M Boyce; Patricia A Farrel; Dana Towle; Renee Fekieta; Michael Aniskiewicz Journal: Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol Date: 2016-03-23 Impact factor: 3.254