Aaron N Dunn1, Pavel Vaisberg2, Thomas G Fraser3, Curtis J Donskey4, Abhishek Deshpande5. 1. Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH. 2. Department of Physiology and Biophysics, School of Medicine, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH. 3. Department of Infectious Diseases, Respiratory Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH. 4. Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Center, Cleveland Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Cleveland, OH. 5. Department of Infectious Diseases, Respiratory Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH; Medicine Institute Center for Value-Based Care Research, Medicine Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH. Electronic address: abhishekdp@gmail.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mobile ultraviolet C (UV-C) room decontamination devices are widely used in health care facilities; however, there is limited information on the perceptions of patients, health care workers (HCWs), and environmental services staff (EVS-staff) regarding their use for environmental decontamination. METHODS: An anonymous questionnaire was administered to participants in 4 medical/surgical units of a tertiary care hospital where UV-C devices were deployed for a 6-month period. Survey questions assessed perceptions regarding the importance of environmental disinfection, effectiveness of UV-C decontamination, willingness to delay hospital admission in order to use UV-C, and safety of UV-C devices. RESULTS: Questionnaires were completed by 102 patients, 130 HCWs, and 47 EVS-staff. All of the HCWs and EVS-staff and 99% of the patients agreed that environmental disinfection is important to reduce the risk of exposure from contaminated surfaces. Ninety-eight percent of the EVS-staff, 89% of the HCWs, and 96% of the patients felt that the use of UV-C as an adjunct to routine cleaning increased confidence that rooms are clean. Ninety-four percent of the EVS-staff, 85% of the HCWs, and 90% of the patients expressed a willingness to delay being admitted to a room in order to have UV-C decontamination completed. Seventy-nine percent of the EVS-staff, 76% of the HCWs, and 86% of the patients had no concerns about the safety of UV-C devices. CONCLUSIONS: Patients, HCWs, and EVS-staff agreed that environmental disinfection is important and that UV-C devices are efficacious and safe. Educational tools are needed to allay safety concerns expressed by a minority of HCWs and EVS-staff.
BACKGROUND: Mobile ultraviolet C (UV-C) room decontamination devices are widely used in health care facilities; however, there is limited information on the perceptions of patients, health care workers (HCWs), and environmental services staff (EVS-staff) regarding their use for environmental decontamination. METHODS: An anonymous questionnaire was administered to participants in 4 medical/surgical units of a tertiary care hospital where UV-C devices were deployed for a 6-month period. Survey questions assessed perceptions regarding the importance of environmental disinfection, effectiveness of UV-C decontamination, willingness to delay hospital admission in order to use UV-C, and safety of UV-C devices. RESULTS: Questionnaires were completed by 102 patients, 130 HCWs, and 47 EVS-staff. All of the HCWs and EVS-staff and 99% of the patients agreed that environmental disinfection is important to reduce the risk of exposure from contaminated surfaces. Ninety-eight percent of the EVS-staff, 89% of the HCWs, and 96% of the patients felt that the use of UV-C as an adjunct to routine cleaning increased confidence that rooms are clean. Ninety-four percent of the EVS-staff, 85% of the HCWs, and 90% of the patients expressed a willingness to delay being admitted to a room in order to have UV-C decontamination completed. Seventy-nine percent of the EVS-staff, 76% of the HCWs, and 86% of the patients had no concerns about the safety of UV-C devices. CONCLUSIONS:Patients, HCWs, and EVS-staff agreed that environmental disinfection is important and that UV-C devices are efficacious and safe. Educational tools are needed to allay safety concerns expressed by a minority of HCWs and EVS-staff.
Authors: Marisol Resendiz; Dawn M Blanchard; Michael B Lustik; Timothy S Horseman; Gordon F West Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2022-04-01 Impact factor: 4.996