Michael O Ryan1, Charles N Haas2, Patrick L Gurian2, Charles P Gerba3, Brian M Panzl4, Joan B Rose4. 1. Department of Civil, Architectural, and Environmental Engineering, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA. Electronic address: mor23@drexel.edu. 2. Department of Civil, Architectural, and Environmental Engineering, Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA. 3. Department of Soil, Water, and Environmental Science, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ. 4. Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This quantitative microbial risk assessment (QMRA) included problem formulation for fomites and hazard identification for 7 microorganisms, including pathogenic Escherichia coli and E coli 0157:H7, Listeria monocytogenes, norovirus, Pseudomonas spp, Salmonella spp, and Staphylococcus aureus. The goal was to address a risk-based process for choosing the log10 reduction recommendations, in contrast to the current US Environmental Protection Agency requirements. METHOD: For each microbe evaluated, the QMRA model included specific dose-response models, occurrence determination of aerobic bacteria and specific organisms on fomites, exposure assessment, risk characterization, and risk reduction. Risk estimates were determined for a simple scenario using a single touch of a contaminated surface and self-inoculation. A comparative analysis of log10 reductions, as suggested by the US Environmental Protection Agency, and the risks based on this QMRA approach was also undertaken. RESULTS: The literature review and meta-analysis showed that aerobic bacteria were the most commonly studied on fomites, averaging 100 colony-forming units (CFU)/cm(2). Pseudomonas aeruginosa was found at a level of 3.3 × 10(-1) CFU/cm(2); methicillin-resistant S aureus (MRSA), at 6.4 × 10(-1) CFU/cm(2). Risk estimates per contact event ranged from a high of 10(-3) for norovirus to a low of 10(-9) for S aureus. CONCLUSION: This QMRA analysis suggests that a reduction in bacterial numbers on a fomite by 99% (2 logs) most often will reduce the risk of infection from a single contact to less than 1 in 1 million.
BACKGROUND: This quantitative microbial risk assessment (QMRA) included problem formulation for fomites and hazard identification for 7 microorganisms, including pathogenic Escherichia coli and E coli 0157:H7, Listeria monocytogenes, norovirus, Pseudomonas spp, Salmonella spp, and Staphylococcus aureus. The goal was to address a risk-based process for choosing the log10 reduction recommendations, in contrast to the current US Environmental Protection Agency requirements. METHOD: For each microbe evaluated, the QMRA model included specific dose-response models, occurrence determination of aerobic bacteria and specific organisms on fomites, exposure assessment, risk characterization, and risk reduction. Risk estimates were determined for a simple scenario using a single touch of a contaminated surface and self-inoculation. A comparative analysis of log10 reductions, as suggested by the US Environmental Protection Agency, and the risks based on this QMRA approach was also undertaken. RESULTS: The literature review and meta-analysis showed that aerobic bacteria were the most commonly studied on fomites, averaging 100 colony-forming units (CFU)/cm(2). Pseudomonas aeruginosa was found at a level of 3.3 × 10(-1) CFU/cm(2); methicillin-resistant S aureus (MRSA), at 6.4 × 10(-1) CFU/cm(2). Risk estimates per contact event ranged from a high of 10(-3) for norovirus to a low of 10(-9) for S aureus. CONCLUSION: This QMRA analysis suggests that a reduction in bacterial numbers on a fomite by 99% (2 logs) most often will reduce the risk of infection from a single contact to less than 1 in 1 million.
Authors: Gomaa Mostafa-Hedeab; Abdou Kamal Allayeh; Hany Abdelfattah Elhady; Abozer Y Eledrdery; Mobarak Abu Mraheil; Ahmed Mostafa Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-06-23 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Kelly A Reynolds; Marc P Verhougstraete; Kristina D Mena; Syed A Sattar; Elizabeth A Scott; Charles P Gerba Journal: J Appl Microbiol Date: 2021-09-18 Impact factor: 4.059
Authors: Yafang Cheng; Nan Ma; Christian Witt; Steffen Rapp; Philipp S Wild; Meinrat O Andreae; Ulrich Pöschl; Hang Su Journal: Science Date: 2021-05-20 Impact factor: 63.714
Authors: Mary E Schoen; Michael A Jahne; Jay Garland; Lucia Ramirez; Allison J Lopatkin; Kerry A Hamilton Journal: Environ Sci Technol Date: 2021-10-26 Impact factor: 9.028
Authors: Katie N Overbey; Nicholas C Zachos; Caroline Coulter; Joseph Jacangelo; Kellogg J Schwab Journal: Front Cell Infect Microbiol Date: 2021-07-07 Impact factor: 5.293
Authors: Annalaura Carducci; Gabriele Donzelli; Lorenzo Cioni; Marco Verani Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2016-07-20 Impact factor: 3.390