Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorReid, Matthewen
dc.contributor.authorWhatley, Vanessaen
dc.contributor.authorSpooner, Emmaen
dc.contributor.authorNevill, Alan M.en
dc.contributor.authorCooper, Michaelen
dc.contributor.authorRamsden, Jeremy Jen
dc.contributor.authorDancer, Stephanie Jen
dc.date.accessioned2018-03-27T15:54:31Z
dc.date.available2018-03-27T15:54:31Z
dc.date.issued2018-04
dc.identifier.citationHow Does a Photocatalytic Antimicrobial Coating Affect Environmental Bioburden in Hospitals? 2018, 39 (4):398-404 Infect Control Hosp Epidemiolen
dc.identifier.issn0899-823Xen
dc.identifier.pmid29428003
dc.identifier.doi10.1017/ice.2017.297
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2436/621204
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND The healthcare environment is recognized as a source for healthcare-acquired infection. Because cleaning practices are often erratic and always intermittent, we hypothesize that continuously antimicrobial surfaces offer superior control of surface bioburden. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the impact of a photocatalytic antimicrobial coating at near-patient, high-touch sites in a hospital ward. SETTING The study took place in 2 acute-care wards in a large acute-care hospital. METHODS A titanium dioxide-based photocatalytic coating was sprayed onto 6 surfaces in a 4-bed bay in a ward and compared under normal illumination against the same surfaces in an untreated ward: right and left bed rails, bed control, bedside locker, overbed table, and bed footboard. Using standardized methods, the overall microbial burden and presence of an indicator pathogen (Staphylococcus aureus) were assessed biweekly for 12 weeks. RESULTS Treated surfaces demonstrated significantly lower microbial burden than control sites, and the difference increased between treated and untreated surfaces during the study. Hygiene failures (>2.5 colony-forming units [CFU]/cm2) increased 2.6% per day for control surfaces (odds ratio [OR], 1.026; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.009-1.043; P=.003) but declined 2.5% per day for treated surfaces (OR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.925-0.977; P<.001). We detected no significant difference between coated and control surfaces regarding S. aureus contamination. CONCLUSION Photocatalytic coatings reduced the bioburden of high-risk surfaces in the healthcare environment. Treated surfaces became steadily cleaner, while untreated surfaces accumulated bioburden. This evaluation encourages a larger-scale investigation to ascertain whether the observed environmental amelioration has an effect on healthcare-acquired infection. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2018;39:398-404.
dc.formatapplication/msworden
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherCambridge University Pressen
dc.rightsArchived with thanks to Infection control and hospital epidemiologyen
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/*
dc.titleHow Does a Photocatalytic Antimicrobial Coating Affect Environmental Bioburden in Hospitals?en
dc.typeArticleen
dc.identifier.journalInfection control and hospital epidemiologyen
dc.date.accepted2018-02-01
rioxxterms.funderinternalen
rioxxterms.identifier.projectUOW270318AN2en
rioxxterms.versionAMen
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/en
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2018-08-12en
refterms.dateFOA2018-08-12T00:00:00Z
html.description.abstractBACKGROUND The healthcare environment is recognized as a source for healthcare-acquired infection. Because cleaning practices are often erratic and always intermittent, we hypothesize that continuously antimicrobial surfaces offer superior control of surface bioburden. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the impact of a photocatalytic antimicrobial coating at near-patient, high-touch sites in a hospital ward. SETTING The study took place in 2 acute-care wards in a large acute-care hospital. METHODS A titanium dioxide-based photocatalytic coating was sprayed onto 6 surfaces in a 4-bed bay in a ward and compared under normal illumination against the same surfaces in an untreated ward: right and left bed rails, bed control, bedside locker, overbed table, and bed footboard. Using standardized methods, the overall microbial burden and presence of an indicator pathogen (Staphylococcus aureus) were assessed biweekly for 12 weeks. RESULTS Treated surfaces demonstrated significantly lower microbial burden than control sites, and the difference increased between treated and untreated surfaces during the study. Hygiene failures (>2.5 colony-forming units [CFU]/cm2) increased 2.6% per day for control surfaces (odds ratio [OR], 1.026; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.009-1.043; P=.003) but declined 2.5% per day for treated surfaces (OR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.925-0.977; P<.001). We detected no significant difference between coated and control surfaces regarding S. aureus contamination. CONCLUSION Photocatalytic coatings reduced the bioburden of high-risk surfaces in the healthcare environment. Treated surfaces became steadily cleaner, while untreated surfaces accumulated bioburden. This evaluation encourages a larger-scale investigation to ascertain whether the observed environmental amelioration has an effect on healthcare-acquired infection. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2018;39:398-404.


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
Photocatalytic paper FINAL(wit ...
Size:
154.5Kb
Format:
Microsoft Word

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Archived with thanks to Infection control and hospital epidemiology
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Archived with thanks to Infection control and hospital epidemiology