Ultraviolet-C-based sanitization is a cost-effective option for hospitals to manage health care-associated infection risks from high touch mobile phones.

IF 1.6 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Frontiers in health services Pub Date : 2025-01-13 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.3389/frhs.2024.1448913
David C Cook, Matthew Olsen, Oystein Tronstad, John F Fraser, Adrian Goldsworthy, Rashed Alghafri, Simon J McKirdy, Lotti Tajouri
{"title":"Ultraviolet-C-based sanitization is a cost-effective option for hospitals to manage health care-associated infection risks from high touch mobile phones.","authors":"David C Cook, Matthew Olsen, Oystein Tronstad, John F Fraser, Adrian Goldsworthy, Rashed Alghafri, Simon J McKirdy, Lotti Tajouri","doi":"10.3389/frhs.2024.1448913","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Mobile phones have become essential tools for health care workers around the world, but as high touch surfaces, they can harbor microorganisms that pose infection risks to patients and staff. As their use in hospitals increases, hospital managers must introduce measures to sanitize mobile phones and reduce risks of health care-associated infections. But such measures can involve substantial costs. Our objective in this paper was to consider two mobile phone risk mitigation strategies that managers of a hypothetical hospital could implement and determine which involves the lowest cost. The first strategy required all staff to sanitize their hands after every contact with a mobile phone. The second involved the hospital investing in ultraviolet-C-based mobile phone sanitization devices that allowed staff to decontaminate their mobile phones after every use. We assessed each intervention on material and opportunity costs assuming both achieved an equivalent reduction in microbe transmission within the hospital. We found that ultraviolet-C devices were the most cost-effective intervention, with median costs of approximately AUD360 per bed per year compared to AUD965 using hand hygiene protocols. Our results imply that a 200-bed hospital could potentially save AUD1-1.4 million over 10 years by investing in germicidal ultraviolet-C phone sanitizers rather than relying solely on hand hygiene protocols.</p>","PeriodicalId":73088,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in health services","volume":"4 ","pages":"1448913"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11769977/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in health services","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/frhs.2024.1448913","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Mobile phones have become essential tools for health care workers around the world, but as high touch surfaces, they can harbor microorganisms that pose infection risks to patients and staff. As their use in hospitals increases, hospital managers must introduce measures to sanitize mobile phones and reduce risks of health care-associated infections. But such measures can involve substantial costs. Our objective in this paper was to consider two mobile phone risk mitigation strategies that managers of a hypothetical hospital could implement and determine which involves the lowest cost. The first strategy required all staff to sanitize their hands after every contact with a mobile phone. The second involved the hospital investing in ultraviolet-C-based mobile phone sanitization devices that allowed staff to decontaminate their mobile phones after every use. We assessed each intervention on material and opportunity costs assuming both achieved an equivalent reduction in microbe transmission within the hospital. We found that ultraviolet-C devices were the most cost-effective intervention, with median costs of approximately AUD360 per bed per year compared to AUD965 using hand hygiene protocols. Our results imply that a 200-bed hospital could potentially save AUD1-1.4 million over 10 years by investing in germicidal ultraviolet-C phone sanitizers rather than relying solely on hand hygiene protocols.

手机已成为世界各地医护人员的必备工具,但作为高接触表面,手机可能滋生微生物,给病人和员工带来感染风险。随着手机在医院中使用的增加,医院管理者必须采取措施对手机进行消毒,降低医疗相关感染的风险。但这些措施可能会涉及大量成本。本文的目的是考虑假设医院的管理者可以实施的两种手机风险缓解策略,并确定哪种成本最低。第一种策略要求所有员工在每次接触手机后进行手部消毒。第二种策略是医院投资购买基于紫外线-C 的手机消毒设备,让员工在每次使用手机后都能对其进行消毒。我们对每种干预措施的物质成本和机会成本进行了评估,假设两种干预措施都能同等程度地减少医院内的微生物传播。我们发现,紫外线消毒设备是最具成本效益的干预措施,每张病床每年的成本中位数约为 360 澳元,而使用手部卫生协议的成本中位数为 965 澳元。我们的研究结果表明,如果一家拥有 200 张床位的医院投资紫外线-C 手机消毒器,而不是仅仅依靠手部卫生规范,那么在 10 年内就有可能节省 100-140 万澳元。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信