BACKGROUND: Healthcare workers' mobile phones are easily contaminated with pathogenic bacteria and could be vehicles of transmission. Smart phones are increasingly used in the hospital. The objective of this study was to compare the contamination rate of bacteria with pathogenic potential between smart phones and non-smart phones. METHODS: We screened mobile phones of healthcare workers in three teaching hospitals in South Korea. The identification of cultivated micro-organisms and assessment of antibiotic susceptibility were performed. RESULTS: One hundred fifteen (56.7%) participants used smart phones, and 88 (43.3%) used non-smart phones. Bacteria with pathogenic potential were isolated from 58 (28.6%) mobile phones, more often from smart phones than from non-smart phones (34.8% vs 20.5%, P=0.03). Multivariate analysis including various characteristics to determine risk factors revealed that only smart phones (vs non-smart phones) were a significant risk factor for contamination by bacteria with pathogenic potential (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 4.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.43-11.31). Also, in a multivariate model including phone size, the smart phone was still a significant risk factor for the pathogen contamination (OR, 4.17; 95% CI, 1.07-16.33; P=0.04). CONCLUSION: The smart phones of healthcare workers were contaminated with bacteria with pathogenic potential to a greater extent than were non-smart phones.
BACKGROUND: Healthcare workers' mobile phones are easily contaminated with pathogenic bacteria and could be vehicles of transmission. Smart phones are increasingly used in the hospital. The objective of this study was to compare the contamination rate of bacteria with pathogenic potential between smart phones and non-smart phones. METHODS: We screened mobile phones of healthcare workers in three teaching hospitals in South Korea. The identification of cultivated micro-organisms and assessment of antibiotic susceptibility were performed. RESULTS: One hundred fifteen (56.7%) participants used smart phones, and 88 (43.3%) used non-smart phones. Bacteria with pathogenic potential were isolated from 58 (28.6%) mobile phones, more often from smart phones than from non-smart phones (34.8% vs 20.5%, P=0.03). Multivariate analysis including various characteristics to determine risk factors revealed that only smart phones (vs non-smart phones) were a significant risk factor for contamination by bacteria with pathogenic potential (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 4.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.43-11.31). Also, in a multivariate model including phone size, the smart phone was still a significant risk factor for the pathogen contamination (OR, 4.17; 95% CI, 1.07-16.33; P=0.04). CONCLUSION: The smart phones of healthcare workers were contaminated with bacteria with pathogenic potential to a greater extent than were non-smart phones.
Authors: Steev Loyola; Luz R Gutierrez; Gertrudis Horna; Kyle Petersen; Juan Agapito; Jorge Osada; Paul Rios; Andres G Lescano; Jesus Tamariz Journal: Am J Infect Control Date: 2016-04-07 Impact factor: 2.918
Authors: Anutthaman Parthasarathy; Narayan H Wong; Amanda N Weiss; Susan Tian; Sara E Ali; Nicole T Cavanaugh; Tyler M Chinsky; Chelsea E Cramer; Aditya Gupta; Rakshanda Jha; Loryn K Johnson; Elizabeth D Tuason; Lauren M Klafehn; Varada Krishnadas; Ryan J Musich; Jennifer M Pfaff; Spencer C Richman; Alexandria J Shumway; André O Hudson Journal: J Genomics Date: 2019-02-19
Authors: Yi Chao Foong; Mark Green; Ahmad Zargari; Romana Siddique; Vanessa Tan; Terry Brain; Kathryn Ogden Journal: J Occup Environ Hyg Date: 2015 Impact factor: 2.155