Bianka Sobolewska1, Michael Buhl2, Jan Liese2, Focke Ziemssen3. 1. Center for Ophthalmology, Eberhard-Karls University, Tuebingen, Germany. bianka.sob@gmx.de. 2. Institute of Medical Mircrobiology and Hygiene, Eberhard-Karls University, Tuebingen, Germany. 3. Center for Ophthalmology, Eberhard-Karls University, Tuebingen, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to evaluate the bacterial contamination level of contact surfaces on slit lamps and the grip areas of lenses. METHODS: Within unannounced audits, two regions of the slit lamps (headrest and joystick), indirect ophthalmoscopy devices, and ultrasound probes were obtained with rayon-tipped swab. Non-contact lenses used for indirect fundoscopy were pressed on RODAC (Replicate Organism Detection and Counting) plates. One hundred and eighty-one surfaces were sampled. The total number of colony-forming units was assessed and bacterial species were identified. Spa-typing and antimicrobial susceptibility testing were performed from Staphylococcus aureus isolates. RESULTS: Among the total bacterial isolates from ophthalmological equipment (lenses: 51 of 78, slit lamps: 43 of 88, ophthalmoscopy helmets: 3 of 8, ultrasound probes: 2 of 7), coagulase-negative staphylococci (CNS) was most frequently found, followed by Micrococcus spp. (lenses vs. slit lamps: P < 0.001 and P = 0.01, respectively). The bacterial contamination of lenses (76%) was significantly higher than that of slit lamps (54%) (P < 0.003). A significantly higher contamination with CNS was observed on lenses from residents vs. from consultants (78% vs. 35%, P = 0.01). A total of seven different spa-types of S. aureus were isolated. No correlation was found between S. aureus contamination of different ophthalmological equipments (Spearman's rank correlation coefficient, ρ = 0.04, P = 0.75). Methicillin-resistant S. aureus was not detected. CONCLUSION: Bacterial species of the normal skin flora were isolated from the ophthalmological equipment. The bacterial contamination of the portable devices was significantly higher than that of slit lamps. Therefore, proper hygiene of the mobile instruments should be monitored in order to prevent transmission of bacteria in residents and consultants.
PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to evaluate the bacterial contamination level of contact surfaces on slit lamps and the grip areas of lenses. METHODS: Within unannounced audits, two regions of the slit lamps (headrest and joystick), indirect ophthalmoscopy devices, and ultrasound probes were obtained with rayon-tipped swab. Non-contact lenses used for indirect fundoscopy were pressed on RODAC (Replicate Organism Detection and Counting) plates. One hundred and eighty-one surfaces were sampled. The total number of colony-forming units was assessed and bacterial species were identified. Spa-typing and antimicrobial susceptibility testing were performed from Staphylococcus aureus isolates. RESULTS: Among the total bacterial isolates from ophthalmological equipment (lenses: 51 of 78, slit lamps: 43 of 88, ophthalmoscopy helmets: 3 of 8, ultrasound probes: 2 of 7), coagulase-negative staphylococci (CNS) was most frequently found, followed by Micrococcus spp. (lenses vs. slit lamps: P < 0.001 and P = 0.01, respectively). The bacterial contamination of lenses (76%) was significantly higher than that of slit lamps (54%) (P < 0.003). A significantly higher contamination with CNS was observed on lenses from residents vs. from consultants (78% vs. 35%, P = 0.01). A total of seven different spa-types of S. aureus were isolated. No correlation was found between S. aureus contamination of different ophthalmological equipments (Spearman's rank correlation coefficient, ρ = 0.04, P = 0.75). Methicillin-resistant S. aureus was not detected. CONCLUSION: Bacterial species of the normal skin flora were isolated from the ophthalmological equipment. The bacterial contamination of the portable devices was significantly higher than that of slit lamps. Therefore, proper hygiene of the mobile instruments should be monitored in order to prevent transmission of bacteria in residents and consultants.
Authors: Shelley S Magill; Jonathan R Edwards; Wendy Bamberg; Zintars G Beldavs; Ghinwa Dumyati; Marion A Kainer; Ruth Lynfield; Meghan Maloney; Laura McAllister-Hollod; Joelle Nadle; Susan M Ray; Deborah L Thompson; Lucy E Wilson; Scott K Fridkin Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2014-03-27 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Birgit Fritz; Edita Paschko; Wayne Young; Daniel Böhringer; Siegfried Wahl; Focke Ziemssen; Markus Egert Journal: Front Cell Infect Microbiol Date: 2021-11-17 Impact factor: 5.293