| Literature DB >> 35206511 |
Larissa Kalb1, Pauline Bäßler1, Wulf Schneider-Brachert2, Daniel Bernhard Eckl3.
Abstract
Millions of people use public transportation daily worldwide and frequently touch surfaces, thereby producing a reservoir of microorganisms on surfaces increasing the risk of transmission. Constant occupation makes sufficient cleaning difficult to achieve. Thus, an autonomous, permanent, antimicrobial coating (AMC) could keep down the microbial burden on such surfaces. A photodynamic AMC was applied to frequently touched surfaces in buses. The microbial burden (colony forming units, cfu) was determined weekly and compared to equivalent surfaces in buses without AMC (references). The microbial burden ranged from 0-209 cfu/cm2 on references and from 0-54 cfu/cm2 on AMC. The means were 13.4 ± 29.6 cfu/cm2 on references and 4.5 ± 8.4 cfu/cm2 on AMC (p < 0.001). The difference in microbial burden on AMC and references was almost constant throughout the study. Considering a hygiene benchmark of 5 cfu/cm2, the data yield an absolute risk reduction of 22.6% and a relative risk reduction of 50.7%. In conclusion, photodynamic AMC kept down the microbial burden, reducing the risk of transmission of microorganisms. AMC permanently and autonomously contributes to hygienic conditions on surfaces in public transportation. Photodynamic AMC therefore are suitable for reducing the microbial load and closing hygiene gaps in public transportation.Entities:
Keywords: AMC; antimicrobial coating; photodynamic inactivation; public transportation
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35206511 PMCID: PMC8872155 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19042325
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1(A) Sampling sites of the public transport buses. Sites 1–3 were surfaces frequently touched by the operator including two door opening buttons (1, 2) and the steering wheel (3). Sampling sites 4–6 were frequently touched surfaces in the passenger part of the bus, including a stop button (4), a textured handrail (5) and a nontextured handrail (6). (B) The values of microbial burden of the prestudy sampling are shown as box plots with the median and the quartile ranges.
Figure 2Results from laboratory experiments. The illuminated sample with photosensitizer in the coating achieves a logarithmic reduction exceeding 4 log10 steps (blue bar), while dark control (pink bar) and the recovery control (recovery control) led to no noteworthy bacterial reduction. Error bars represent the standard deviation of the experiments (n = 5).
Figure 3The values of microbial burden on uncoated references and on antimicrobial coatings are shown as box plots with the median and the quartile ranges.
Microbial burden regarding different benchmarks. The numbers given are the events concerning the given benchmark.
| Benchmarks | Uncoated | Antimicrobial Coating | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number | Percent | Number | Percent | |
| cfu/cm2 ≤ 2.5 | 68 | 40.5% | 107 | 63.7% |
| cfu/cm2 > 2.5 | 100 | 59.5% | 61 | 36.3% |
| cfu/cm2 ≤ 5 | 93 | 55.4% | 131 | 78.0% |
| cfu/cm2 > 5 | 75 | 44.6% | 37 | 22.0% |
Figure 4The mean values for all 14 samplings. The regression line indicates an almost constant difference between uncoated references without antimicrobial effect and the sites with the antimicrobial coating.