Search

Background: Hospital patient room surfaces are frequently contaminated with multidrug-resistant organisms. Since studies have demonstrated that inadequate terminal room disinfection commonly occurs, ..úno touch..Ñ methods of terminal room disinfection have been developed such as ultraviolet light (UV) devices and hydrogen peroxide (HP) systems., Methods: This paper reviews published clinical trials of ..úno touch..Ñ methods and ..úself-disinfecting..Ñ surfaces., Results: Multiple papers were identified including clinical trials of UV room disinfection devices (N.ß=.ß20), HP room disinfection systems (N.ß=.ß8), handheld UV devices (N.ß=.ß1), and copper-impregnated or coated surfaces (N.ß=.ß5). Most but not all clinical trials of UV devices and HP systems for terminal disinfection demonstrated a reduction of colonization/infection in patients subsequently housed in the room. Copper-coated surfaces were the only ..úself-disinfecting..Ñ technology evaluated by clinical trials. Results of these clinical trials were mixed., Discussion: Almost all clinical trials reviewed used a ..úweak..Ñ design (eg, before-after) and failed to assess potential confounders (eg, compliance with hand hygiene and environmental cleaning)., Conclusions: The evidence is strong enough to recommend the use of a ..úno-touch..Ñ method as an adjunct for outbreak control, mitigation strategy for high-consequence pathogens (eg, Candida auris or Ebola), or when there are an excessive endemic rates of multidrug-resistant organisms., (Copyright © 2023 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Endocavitary probes are semi-critical devices and must undergo, at least, high level disinfection (HLD) between uses. Therefore, they should be high level disinfected between uses (i.e., with a product/process that kills all forms of microbial life; bacteria, fungi, mycobacteria, and virus, and in some countries, a demonstrated potential for sporicidal activity). In this study, the sporicidal activity of three common Food and Drug Administration cleared sterilants (CIDEX OPA Solution, SPOROX II Sterilizing and Disinfection Solution and CIDEX Activated Dialdehyde Solution) was compared with the sporicidal activity of an ultraviolet disinfection technology (Hypernova Chronos, Germitec) against Bacillus subtilis ATCC 19659 spores spread on silicone flat carriers in the presence of inorganic and organic soil., Results: The results indicate that the UV disinfection process presented within a 35 seconds exposure time a sporicidal efficacy substantially higher than the chemical sterilants used according to manufacturer instructions for HLD., Conclusions: This study demonstrated that even if it cannot be tested/approved as a sterilant according to AOAC 966.04, the UV unit is much more effective than usual Food and Drug Administration approved chemical HLD products to kill spores in real use conditions. This finding questions the relevancy of evaluating product efficacy within extended conditions giving results that could mislead users to select the most effective HLD product/process for the reprocessing of their medical devices., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

All invasive procedures involve contact by a medical device or surgical instrument with a patient's sterile tissue or mucous membranes. The level of disinfection is dependent on the intended use of the object: critical, semicritical, or noncritical. New issues and practices can affect the risk of infection associated with devices and surfaces. Endoscopes continue to represent a nosocomial hazard. The contaminated surface environment in hospital rooms is important in the transmission of health care-associated pathogens. Thoroughness of cleaning must be monitored and no-touch room decontamination technology should be. In general, emerging pathogens are susceptible to currently available disinfectants., Competing Interests: Disclosure Drs W.A. Rutala and D.J. Weber are consultants for Professional Disposables International (PDI) and Dr W.J. Weber is a consultant for Germitec., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The contaminated surface environment in the rooms of hospitalized patients is an important risk factor for the colonization and infection of patients with multidrug-resistant pathogens. Improved terminal cleaning and disinfection have been demonstrated to reduce the incidence of health care-associated infections. In the United States, hospitals generally perform daily cleaning and disinfection of patient rooms. However, cleaning and disinfection are limited by the presence of the patient in room (eg, current ultraviolet devices and hydrogen peroxide systems cannot be used) and the fact that after disinfection pathogenic bacteria rapidly recolonize surfaces and medical devices/equipment. For this reason, there has been great interest in developing methods of continuous room disinfection and/or "self-disinfecting" surfaces. This study will review the research on self-disinfecting surfaces (eg, copper-coated surfaces and persistent chemical disinfectants) and potential new room disinfection methods (eg, "blue light" and diluted hydrogen peroxide systems)., (Copyright © 2019 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Semicritical medical devices are defined as items that come into contact with mucous membranes or nonintact skin (eg, gastrointestinal endoscopes, endocavitary probes). Such medical devices require minimally high-level disinfection. As many of these items are temperature sensitive, low-temperature chemical methods must be used rather than steam sterilization. Strict adherence to current guidelines is required as more outbreaks have been linked to inadequately cleaned or disinfected endoscopes and other semicritical items than any other reusable medical devices., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Over the past decade, there is excellent evidence in the scientific literature that contaminated environmental surfaces and noncritical patient care items play an important role in the transmission of several key health care-associated pathogens including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, vancomycin-resistant enterococci, Acinetobacter, norovirus, and Clostridium difficile. Thus, surface disinfection of noncritical environmental surfaces and medical devices is one of the infection prevention strategies to prevent pathogen transmission. This article will discuss a bundle approach to facilitate effective surface cleaning and disinfection in health care facilities. A bundle is a set of evidence-based practices, generally 3-5, that when performed collectively and reliably have been proven to improve patient outcomes. This bundle has 5 components and the science associated with each component will be addressed. These components are: creating evidence-based policies and procedures; selection of appropriate cleaning and disinfecting products; educating staff to include environmental services, patient equipment, and nursing; monitoring compliance (eg, thoroughness of cleaning, product use) with feedback (ie, just in time coaching); and implementing a "no touch" room decontamination technology and to ensure compliance for patients on contact and enteric precautions. This article will also discuss new technologies (eg, continuous room decontamination technology) that may enhance our infection prevention strategies in the future., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: Hospital environmental surfaces are frequently contaminated by microorganisms. However, the causal mechanism of bacterial contamination of the environment as a source of transmission is still debated. This prospective study was performed to characterize the nature of multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO) transmission between the environment and patients using standard microbiological and molecular techniques., Setting: Prospective cohort study at 2 academic medical centers., Design: A prospective multicenter study to characterize the nature of bacterial transfer events between patients and environmental surfaces in rooms that previously housed patients with 1 of 4 'marker' MDROs: methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, vancomycin-resistant enterococci, Clostridium difficile, and MDR Acinetobacter baumannii. Environmental and patient microbiological samples were obtained on admission into a freshly disinfected inpatient room. Repeat samples from room surfaces and patients were taken on days 3 and 7 and each week the patient stayed in the same room. The bacterial identity, antibiotic susceptibility, and molecular sequences were compared between organisms found in the environment samples and patient sources., Results: We enrolled 80 patient-room admissions; 9 of these patients (11.3%) were asymptomatically colonized with MDROs at study entry. Hospital room surfaces were contaminated with MDROs despite terminal disinfection in 44 cases (55%). Microbiological Bacterial Transfer events either to the patient, the environment, or both occurred in 12 patient encounters (18.5%) from the microbiologically evaluable cohort., Conclusions: Microbiological Bacterial Transfer events between patients and the environment were observed in 18.5% of patient encounters and occurred early in the admission. This study suggests that research on prevention methods beyond the standard practice of room disinfection at the end of a patient's stay is needed to better prevent acquisition of MDROs through the environment.

We evaluated the ability of high-intensity visible violet light with a peak output of 405 nm to kill epidemiologically important pathogens. The high irradiant light significantly reduced both vegetative bacteria and spores at some time points over a 72-hour exposure period.

In this prospective study, we monitored 4 epidemiologically important pathogens (EIPs): methicillin-resistane Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE), Clostridium difficile, and multidrug-resistant (MDR) Acinetobacter to assess the effectiveness of 3 enhanced disinfection strategies for terminal room disinfection against standard practice. Our data demonstrated that a decrease in room contamination with EIPs of 94% was associated with a 35% decrease in subsequent patient colonization and/or infection.

We measured the disinfection of MRSA and Clostridium difficile spores using an ultraviolet C (UV-C) device, and we correlated those results to measurements and computer simulations of UV-C surface intensity. The results demonstrate both large differences in UV light intensity across various surfaces and how this leads to significant differences in disinfection.

Background: The hospital environment is a source of pathogen transmission. The effect of enhanced disinfection strategies on the hospital-wide incidence of infection has not been investigated in a multicentre, randomised controlled trial. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of four disinfection strategies on hospital-wide incidence of multidrug-resistant organisms and Clostridium difficile in the Benefits of Enhanced Terminal Room (BETR) Disinfection study., Methods: We did a prespecified secondary analysis of the results from the BETR Disinfection study, a pragmatic, multicentre, crossover cluster-randomised trial that assessed four different strategies for terminal room disinfection in nine hospitals in the southeastern USA. Rooms from which a patient with a specific infection or colonisation (due to the target organisms C difficile, meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE), or multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter spp) was discharged were terminally disinfected with one of four strategies: standard disinfection (quaternary ammonium disinfectant, except for C difficile, for which 10% hypochlorite [bleach] was used; reference); standard disinfection and disinfecting ultraviolet light (UV-C), except for C difficile, for which bleach and UV-C was used (UV strategy); 10% hypochlorite (bleach strategy); and bleach and UV-C (bleach and UV strategy). We randomly assigned the sequence of strategies for each hospital (1:1:1:1), and each strategy was used for 7 months, including a 1-month wash-in period and 6 months of data collection. The prespecified secondary outcomes were hospital-wide, hospital-acquired incidence of all target organisms (calculated as number of patients with hospital-acquired infection with a target organism per 10 000 patient days), and hospital-wide, hospital-acquired incidence of each target organism separately. BETR Disinfection is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01579370., Findings: Between April, 2012, and July, 2014, there were 271 740 unique patients with 375 918 admissions. 314 610 admissions met all inclusion criteria (n=73 071 in the reference study period, n=81 621 in the UV study period, n=78 760 in the bleach study period, and n=81 158 in the bleach and UV study period). 2681 incidenct cases of hospital-acquired infection or colonisation occurred during the study. There was no significant difference in the hospital-wide risk of target organism acquisition between standard disinfection and the three enhanced terminal disinfection strategies for all target multidrug-resistant organisms (UV study period relative risk [RR] 0·89, 95% CI 0·79-1·00; p=0·052; bleach study period 0·92, 0·79-1·08; p=0·32; bleach and UV study period 0·99, 0·89-1·11; p=0·89). The decrease in risk in the UV study period was driven by decreases in risk of acquisition of C difficile (RR 0·89, 95% CI 0·80-0·99; p=0·031) and VRE (0·56, 0·31-0·996; p=0·048)., Interpretation: Enhanced terminal room disinfection with UV in a targeted subset of high-risk rooms led to a decrease in hospital-wide incidence of C difficile and VRE. Enhanced disinfection overcomes limitations of standard disinfection strategies and is a potential strategy to reduce the risk of acquisition of multidrug-resistant organisms and C difficile., Funding: US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

OBJECTIVE To summarize and discuss logistic and administrative challenges we encountered during the Benefits of Enhanced Terminal Room (BETR) Disinfection Study and lessons learned that are pertinent to future utilization of ultraviolet (UV) disinfection devices in other hospitals DESIGN Multicenter cluster randomized trial SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS Nine hospitals in the southeastern United States METHODS All participating hospitals developed systems to implement 4 different strategies for terminal room disinfection. We measured compliance with disinfection strategy, barriers to implementation, and perceptions from nurse managers and environmental services (EVS) supervisors throughout the 28-month trial. RESULTS Implementation of enhanced terminal disinfection with UV disinfection devices provides unique challenges, including time pressures from bed control personnel, efficient room identification, negative perceptions from nurse managers, and discharge volume. In the course of the BETR Disinfection Study, we utilized several strategies to overcome these barriers: (1) establishing safety as the priority; (2) improving communication between EVS, bed control, and hospital administration; (3) ensuring availability of necessary resources; and (4) tracking and providing feedback on compliance. Using these strategies, we deployed ultraviolet (UV) disinfection devices in 16,220 (88%) of 18,411 eligible rooms during our trial (median per hospital, 89%; IQR, 86%-92%). CONCLUSIONS Implementation of enhanced terminal room disinfection strategies using UV devices requires recognition and mitigation of 2 key barriers: (1) timely and accurate identification of rooms that would benefit from enhanced terminal disinfection and (2) overcoming time constraints to allow EVS cleaning staff sufficient time to properly employ enhanced terminal disinfection methods. TRIAL REGISTRATION Clinical trials identifier: NCT01579370 Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2018;39:157-163.

Background: Patients admitted to hospital can acquire multidrug-resistant organisms and Clostridium difficile from inadequately disinfected environmental surfaces. We determined the effect of three enhanced strategies for terminal room disinfection (disinfection of a room between occupying patients) on acquisition and infection due to meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, vancomycin-resistant enterococci, C difficile, and multidrug-resistant Acinetobacter., Methods: We did a pragmatic, cluster-randomised, crossover trial at nine hospitals in the southeastern USA. Rooms from which a patient with infection or colonisation with a target organism was discharged were terminally disinfected with one of four strategies: reference (quaternary ammonium disinfectant except for C difficile, for which bleach was used); UV (quaternary ammonium disinfectant and disinfecting ultraviolet [UV-C] light except for C difficile, for which bleach and UV-C were used); bleach; and bleach and UV-C. The next patient admitted to the targeted room was considered exposed. Every strategy was used at each hospital in four consecutive 7-month periods. We randomly assigned the sequence of strategies for each hospital (1:1:1:1). The primary outcomes were the incidence of infection or colonisation with all target organisms among exposed patients and the incidence of C difficile infection among exposed patients in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01579370., Findings: 31 226 patients were exposed; 21 395 (69%) met all inclusion criteria, including 4916 in the reference group, 5178 in the UV group, 5438 in the bleach group, and 5863 in the bleach and UV group. 115 patients had the primary outcome during 22 426 exposure days in the reference group (51·3 per 10 000 exposure days). The incidence of target organisms among exposed patients was significantly lower after adding UV to standard cleaning strategies (n=76; 33·9 cases per 10 000 exposure days; relative risk [RR] 0·70, 95% CI 0·50-0·98; p=0·036). The primary outcome was not statistically lower with bleach (n=101; 41·6 cases per 10 000 exposure days; RR 0·85, 95% CI 0·69-1·04; p=0·116), or bleach and UV (n=131; 45·6 cases per 10 000 exposure days; RR 0·91, 95% CI 0·76-1·09; p=0·303) among exposed patients. Similarly, the incidence of C difficile infection among exposed patients was not changed after adding UV to cleaning with bleach (n=38 vs 36; 30·4 cases vs 31·6 cases per 10 000 exposure days; RR 1·0, 95% CI 0·57-1·75; p=0·997)., Interpretation: A contaminated health-care environment is an important source for acquisition of pathogens; enhanced terminal room disinfection decreases this risk., Funding: US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

When properly used, disinfection and sterilization can ensure the safe use of invasive and noninvasive medical devices. The method of disinfection and sterilization depends on the intended use of the medical device: critical items (contact sterile tissue) must be sterilized before use; semicritical items (contact mucous membranes or nonintact skin) must be high-level disinfected; and noncritical items (contact intact skin) should receive low-level disinfection. Cleaning should always precede high-level disinfection and sterilization. Current disinfection and sterilization guidelines must be strictly followed., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose of Review: This article reviews 'no touch' methods for disinfection of the contaminated surface environment of hospitalized patients' rooms. The focus is on studies that assessed the effectiveness of ultraviolet (UV) light devices, hydrogen peroxide systems, and self-disinfecting surfaces to reduce healthcare-associated infections (HAIs)., Recent Findings: The contaminated surface environment in hospitals plays an important role in the transmission of several key nosocomial pathogens including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus spp., Clostridium difficile, Acinetobacter spp., and norovirus. Multiple clinical trials have now demonstrated the effectiveness of UV light devices and hydrogen peroxide systems to reduce HAIs. A limited number of studies have suggested that 'self-disinfecting' surfaces may also decrease HAIs., Summary: Many studies have demonstrated that terminal cleaning and disinfection with germicides is often inadequate and leaves environmental surfaces contaminated with important nosocomial pathogens. 'No touch' methods of room decontamination (i.e., UV devices and hydrogen peroxide systems) have been demonstrated to reduce key nosocomial pathogens on inoculated test surfaces and on environmental surfaces in actual patient rooms. Further UV devices and hydrogen peroxide systems have been demonstrated to reduce HAI. A validated 'no touch' device or system should be used for terminal room disinfection following discharge of patients on contact precautions. The use of a 'self-disinfecting' surface to reduce HAI has not been convincingly demonstrated.

Semicritical medical devices are defined as items that come into contact with mucous membranes or nonintact skin (eg, gastrointestinal endoscopes, endocavitary probes). Such medical devices minimally require high-level disinfection. Because many of these items are temperature sensitive, low-temperature chemical methods are usually used rather than steam sterilization. Strict adherence to current guidelines is required because more outbreaks have been linked to inadequately cleaned or disinfected endoscopes and other semicritical items undergoing high-level disinfection than any other reusable medical device., (Copyright © 2016 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Disinfection of noncritical environmental surfaces and equipment is an essential component of an infection prevention program. Noncritical environmental surfaces and noncritical medical equipment surfaces may become contaminated with infectious agents and may contribute to cross-transmission by acquisition of transient hand carriage by health care personnel. Disinfection should render surfaces and equipment free of pathogens in sufficient numbers to prevent human disease (ie, hygienically clean)., (Copyright © 2016 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Environmental surfaces have been clearly linked to transmission of key pathogens in health care facilities, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus, Clostridium difficile, norovirus, and multidrug-resistant gram-negative bacilli. For this reason, routine disinfection of environmental surfaces in patient rooms is recommended. In addition, decontamination of shared medical devices between use by different patients is also recommended. Environmental surfaces and noncritical shared medical devices are decontaminated by low-level disinfectants, most commonly phenolics, quaternary ammonium compounds, improved hydrogen peroxides, and hypochlorites. Concern has been raised that the use of germicides by health care personnel may increase the risk of these persons for developing respiratory illnesses (principally asthma) and contact dermatitis. Our data demonstrate that dermatitis and respiratory symptoms (eg, asthma) as a result of chemical exposures, including low-level disinfectants, are exceedingly rare. Unprotected exposures to high-level disinfectants may cause dermatitis and respiratory symptoms. Engineering controls (eg, closed containers, adequate ventilation) and the use of personal protective equipment (eg, gloves) should be used to minimize exposure to high-level disinfectants. The scientific evidence does not support that the use of low-level disinfectants by health care personnel is an important risk for the development of asthma or contact dermatitis., (Copyright © 2016 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The risk of cross-infection from shared ultrasound probes in endorectal and vaginal ultrasonography due to low-level disinfection (LLD) is difficult to estimate because potential infections are also sexually transmitted diseases, and route of contamination is often difficult to establish. In France, the widely used standard for prevention of infections is through the use of probe covers and LLD of the ultrasound transducer by disinfectant wipes. We performed an in silico simulation based on a systematic review to estimate the number of patients infected after endorectal or vaginal ultrasonography examination using LLD for probes., Study Design: We performed a stochastic Monte Carlo computer simulation to produce hypothetical cohorts for a population of 4 million annual ultrasound examinations performed in France, and we estimated the number of infected patients for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), herpes simplex virus, hepatitis B virus, hepatitis C virus, human papilloma virus, cytomegalovirus, and Chlamydia trachomatis. Modeling parameters were estimated by meta-analysis when possible., Results: The probability of infection from a contaminated probe ranged from 1% to 6%, depending on the pathogen. For cases of HIV infection, this would result in approximately 60 infected patients per year. For other common viral infections, the number of new cases ranged from 1,600 to 15,000 per year that could be attributable directly to ultrasound and LLD procedures., Conclusions: Our simulation results showed that, despite cumulative use of probe cover and LLD, there were still some cases of de novo infection that may be attributable to ultrasound procedures. These cases are preventable by reviewing the currently used LLD and/or upgrading LLD to high-level disinfection, as recommended by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

This study was designed to test the efficacy of a washer-disinfector in eliminating selected healthcare-associated pathogens from surgical instruments. Our results showed that a washer-disinfector was extremely effective in eliminating microorganisms (>7-log(10) reduction), including vegetative and spore-forming bacteria, from experimentally contaminated instruments. The washer-disinfector remained effective in eliminating microorganisms in the absence of enzymatic cleaners and detergents.

We tested the ability of an improved hydrogen peroxide solution to decontaminate privacy curtains in inpatient and outpatient areas. The microbial contamination of the curtains was assessed before and after the curtains were sprayed with improved hydrogen peroxide. The disinfectant reduced the microbial load on the privacy curtains by 96.8% in 37 patient rooms., (Copyright © 2014 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose of Review: This article reviews the evidence demonstrating the importance of contamination of hospital surfaces in the transmission of healthcare-associated pathogens and interventions scientifically demonstrated to reduce the levels of microbial contamination and decrease healthcare-associated infections., Recent Findings: The contaminated surface environment in hospitals plays an important role in the transmission of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus spp. (VRE), Clostridium difficile, Acinetobacter spp., and norovirus. Improved surface cleaning and disinfection can reduce transmission of these pathogens. 'No-touch' methods of room disinfection (i.e., devices which produce ultraviolet light or hydrogen peroxide) and 'self-disinfecting' surfaces (e.g., copper) also show promise to decrease contamination and reduce healthcare-associated infections., Summary: Hospital surfaces are frequently contaminated with important healthcare-associated pathogens. Contact with the contaminated environment by healthcare personnel is equally as likely as direct contact with a patient to lead to contamination of the healthcare provider's hands or gloves that may result in patient-to-patient transmission of nosocomial pathogens. Admission to a room previously occupied by a patient with MRSA, VRE, Acinetobacter, or C. difficile increases the risk for the subsequent patient admitted to the room to acquire the pathogen. Improved cleaning and disinfection of room surfaces decreases the risk of healthcare-associated infections.

We tested the ability of an ultraviolet C (UV-C)-reflective wall coating to reduce the time necessary to decontaminate a room using a UV-C-emitting device (Tru-D SmartUVC). The reflective wall coating provided the following time reductions for decontamination: for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, from 25 minutes 13 seconds to 5 minutes 3 seconds ([Formula: see text]), and for Clostridium difficile spores, from 43 minutes 42 seconds to 9 minutes 24 seconds ([Formula: see text]).

Methods to improve disinfection of environmental surfaces in hospital rooms include improving cleaning/disinfection by environmental service workers through education and feedback on cleaning effectiveness (eg, use of fluorescent dyes), "no-touch" methods (eg, UV-C light), and self-disinfecting surfaces. Self-disinfecting surfaces can be created by impregnating or coating surfaces with heavy metals (eg, silver or copper), germicides (eg, triclosan), or miscellaneous methods (eg, light-activated antimicrobials). These methods are under active investigation but to date have not been assessed for their ability to reduce health care-associated infections., (Copyright © 2013 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Environmental contamination plays an important role in the transmission of several key health care-associated pathogens. Effective and thorough cleaning/disinfecting of the patient environment is essential. Room decontamination units (such as ultraviolet-C and hydrogen peroxide systems) aid in reducing environmental contamination after terminal room cleaning and disinfection., (Copyright © 2013 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

All invasive procedures involve contact by a medical device or surgical instrument with a patient's sterile tissue or mucous membranes. The level of disinfection or sterilization is dependent on the intended use of the object: critical (items that contact sterile tissue such as surgical instruments), semicritical (items that contact mucous membrane such as endoscopes), and noncritical (devices that contact only intact skin such as stethoscopes) items require sterilization, high-level disinfection, and low-level disinfection, respectively. Cleaning must always precede high-level disinfection and sterilization., (Copyright © 2013 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Semicritical medical devices are defined as items that come into contact with mucous membranes or nonintact skin (eg, gastrointestinal endoscopes). Such medical devices require minimally high-level disinfection. Because many of these items are temperature sensitive, low-temperature chemical methods must be used rather than steam sterilization. Strict adherence to current guidelines is required because more outbreaks have been linked to inadequately cleaned or disinfected endoscopes undergoing high-level disinfection than any other medical device., (Copyright © 2013 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Medical devices that enter body tissues should be sterile, whereas devices that contact mucous membranes should be high-level disinfected between patients. Failure to ensure proper cleaning and sterilization or disinfection may lead to patient-to-patient transmission of pathogens. This paper describes a protocol that can guide an institution in managing potential disinfection and sterilization failures., (Copyright © 2013 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

This study was designed to test in vitro efficacy of 2 improved hydrogen peroxide (HP) products against 3 standard HP products and 1 quaternary ammonium compound. Improved HP is significantly superior to standard HP at the same concentration and can be used for disinfection of environmental surfaces or noncritical patient care items.

Infrared coagulation devices are used to treat internal hemorrhoids, and as semicritical items should undergo high-level disinfection between patients. We developed and validated a method for disinfecting an infrared coagulation device that cannot be immersed in disinfectant solution., (Copyright © 2012 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In the 2003 severe acute respiratory syndrome outbreak, finding viral nucleic acids on hospital surfaces suggested surfaces could play a role in spread in health care environments. Surface disinfection may interrupt transmission, but few data exist on the effectiveness of health care germicides against coronaviruses on surfaces., Methods: The efficacy of health care germicides against 2 surrogate coronaviruses, mouse hepatitis virus (MHV) and transmissible gastroenteritis virus (TGEV), was tested using the quantitative carrier method on stainless steel surfaces. Germicides were o-phenylphenol/p-tertiary amylphenol) (a phenolic), 70% ethanol, 1:100 sodium hypochlorite, ortho-phthalaldehyde (OPA), instant hand sanitizer (62% ethanol), and hand sanitizing spray (71% ethanol)., Results: After 1-minute contact time, for TGEV, there was a log(10) reduction factor of 3.2 for 70% ethanol, 2.0 for phenolic, 2.3 for OPA, 0.35 for 1:100 hypochlorite, 4.0 for 62% ethanol, and 3.5 for 71% ethanol. For MHV, log(10) reduction factors were 3.9 for 70% ethanol, 1.3 for phenolic, 1.7 for OPA, 0.62 for 1:100 hypochlorite, 2.7 for 62% ethanol, and 2.0 for 71% ethanol., Conclusion: Only ethanol reduced infectivity of the 2 coronaviruses by >3-log(10) after 1 minute. Germicides must be chosen carefully to ensure they are effective against viruses such as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus., (Copyright © 2011 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Failure to perform proper disinfection and sterilization of medical devices may lead to introduction of pathogens, resulting in infection. New techniques have been developed for achieving high-level disinfection and adequate environmental cleanliness. This article examines new technologies for sterilization and high-level disinfection of critical and semicritical items, respectively, and because semicritical items carry the greatest risk of infection, the authors discuss reprocessing semicritical items such as endoscopes and automated endoscope reprocessors, endocavitary probes, prostate biopsy probes, tonometers, laryngoscopes, and infrared coagulation devices. In addition, current issues and practices associated with environmental cleaning are reviewed., (Copyright © 2011. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Recently, health care facilities have started to use a microfiber mopping technique rather than a conventional, cotton string mop to clean floors., Methods: The effectiveness of microfiber mops to reduce microbial levels on floors was investigated. We compared the efficacy of microfiber mops with that of conventional, cotton string mops in 3 test conditions (cotton mop and standard wringer bucket, microfiber mop and standard wringer bucket, microfiber system). Twenty-four rooms were evaluated for each test condition. RODAC plates containing D/E Neutralizing Agar were used to assess "precleaning" and "postcleaning" microbial levels., Results: The microfiber system demonstrated superior microbial removal compared with cotton string mops when used with a detergent cleaner (95% vs 68%, respectively). The use of a disinfectant did not improve the microbial elimination demonstrated by the microfiber system (95% vs 95%, respectively). However, use of disinfectant did significantly improve microbial removal when a cotton string mop was used (95% vs 68%, respectively)., Conclusion: The microfiber system demonstrated superior microbial removal compared with cotton string mops when used with a detergent cleaner. The use of a disinfectant did not improve the microbial elimination demonstrated by the microfiber system.

Background: Transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsies are among the most common outpatient diagnostic procedures in urology clinics and carry the risk of introducing pathogens that may lead to infection., Objective: To investigate the effectiveness of procedures for disinfecting a probe used in ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy., Method: The effectiveness of disinfection was determined by inoculating 10(7) colony forming units (cfu) of Pseudomonas aeruginosa at the following 3 sites on the probe: the interior lumen of the biopsy needle guide, the outside surface of the biopsy needle guide, and the interior lumen of the ultrasound probe where the needle guide passes through the transducer. Each site was investigated separately. After inoculation, the probe was immersed in 2% glutaraldehyde for 20 minutes and then assessed for the level of microbial contamination., Results: The results demonstrated that disinfection (ie, a reduction in bacterial load of greater than 7 log(10) cfu) could be achieved if the needle guide was removed from the probe. However, if the needle guide was left in the probe channel during immersion in 2% glutaraldehyde, disinfection was not achieved (ie, the reduction was approximately 1 log(10) cfu)., Conclusions: Recommendations for probe disinfection are provided and include disassembling the device and immersing the probe and the needle guide separately in a high-level disinfectant.

Background: Disinfection and sterilization are critical components of infection control. Unfortunately, breaches of disinfection and sterilization guidelines are not uncommon., Objective: To describe a method for evaluating a potential breach of guidelines for high-level disinfection and sterilization of medical devices., Methods: The appropriate scientific literature was reviewed to determine the frequency of failures of compliance. A risk assessment model was constructed., Results: A 14-step protocol was constructed to aid infection control professionals in the evaluation of potential disinfection and sterilization failures. In addition, a model is presented for aiding in determining how patients should be notified of the potential adverse event. Sample statements and letters are provided for communicating with the public and individual patients., Conclusion: Use of a protocol can guide an institution in managing potential disinfection and sterilization failures.

All invasive procedures involve contact between a medical device or surgical instrument and a patient's sterile tissue or mucous membranes. A major risk of all such procedures is the introduction of pathogenic microbes that could lead to infection. Failure to properly disinfect or sterilize reusable medical equipment carries a risk associated with breach of the host barriers. The level of disinfection or sterilization is dependent on the intended use of the object: critical items (such as surgical instruments, which contact sterile tissue), semicritical items (such as endoscopes, which contact mucous membranes), and noncritical items (such as stethoscopes, which contact only intact skin) require sterilization, high-level disinfection, and low-level disinfection, respectively. Cleaning must always precede high-level disinfection and sterilization. Users must consider the advantages and disadvantages of specific methods when choosing a disinfection or sterilization process. Adherence to these recommendations should improve disinfection and sterilization practices in health care facilities, thereby reducing infections associated with contaminated patient-care items.