A study of three methods for assessment of hospital environmental cleaning

Philip W. Smith MD , Harlan Sayles MS , Angela Hewlett MD, MS , R. Jennifer Cavalieri BSN, RN , Shawn G. Gibbs PhD , Mark E. Rupp MD
{"title":"A study of three methods for assessment of hospital environmental cleaning","authors":"Philip W. Smith MD ,&nbsp;Harlan Sayles MS ,&nbsp;Angela Hewlett MD, MS ,&nbsp;R. Jennifer Cavalieri BSN, RN ,&nbsp;Shawn G. Gibbs PhD ,&nbsp;Mark E. Rupp MD","doi":"10.1071/HI13001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The environment is increasingly appreciated as a factor in healthcare associated infections. Several methods for measuring environmental contamination are available. Our goal was to compare quantitative microbiology to adenosine triphosphate (ATP) detection on a sample of hospital surfaces both pre- and post-cleaning, and to assess fluorescent marker results in the same rooms.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>In a sample of 10 rooms, ATP readings by relative light units (RLU) and quantitative determination of colony forming units (CFU) were measured pre- and post-cleaning on 10 high-touch hospital environmental surfaces. Removal of fluorescent markers (FM) was evaluated post-cleaning in the same rooms. Methods were compared using correlational analyses.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The ATP readings were usually higher than CFU readings compared with their respective norms for cleanliness. The direction of change in cleanliness assessment (usually down after cleaning) was consistent between the RLU and CFU methods. In addition, CFU and RLU values correlated pre-cleaning, but not postcleaning. Areceiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve suggested a ‘clean’ cutoff of 8 RLU/cm<sup>2</sup> for the ATP assay, higher than 2.5 RLU/cm<sup>2</sup> cutoff most often used. Neither method correlated well with FM results.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The methods for measuring environmental cleanliness have shown inconsistent correlation, but measure different parameters. Additional studies are needed to assess the correlation and predictive value of the three methods for room cleanliness assessment.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":90514,"journal":{"name":"Healthcare infection","volume":"18 2","pages":"Pages 80-85"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1071/HI13001","citationCount":"31","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Healthcare infection","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1835561716300722","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 31

Abstract

Background

The environment is increasingly appreciated as a factor in healthcare associated infections. Several methods for measuring environmental contamination are available. Our goal was to compare quantitative microbiology to adenosine triphosphate (ATP) detection on a sample of hospital surfaces both pre- and post-cleaning, and to assess fluorescent marker results in the same rooms.

Methods

In a sample of 10 rooms, ATP readings by relative light units (RLU) and quantitative determination of colony forming units (CFU) were measured pre- and post-cleaning on 10 high-touch hospital environmental surfaces. Removal of fluorescent markers (FM) was evaluated post-cleaning in the same rooms. Methods were compared using correlational analyses.

Results

The ATP readings were usually higher than CFU readings compared with their respective norms for cleanliness. The direction of change in cleanliness assessment (usually down after cleaning) was consistent between the RLU and CFU methods. In addition, CFU and RLU values correlated pre-cleaning, but not postcleaning. Areceiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve suggested a ‘clean’ cutoff of 8 RLU/cm2 for the ATP assay, higher than 2.5 RLU/cm2 cutoff most often used. Neither method correlated well with FM results.

Conclusions

The methods for measuring environmental cleanliness have shown inconsistent correlation, but measure different parameters. Additional studies are needed to assess the correlation and predictive value of the three methods for room cleanliness assessment.

医院环境清洁评价的三种方法研究
环境越来越被认为是医疗保健相关感染的一个因素。有几种测量环境污染的方法。我们的目的是比较定量微生物学和三磷酸腺苷(ATP)检测在医院表面样品清洁前后,并评估在同一房间的荧光标记结果。方法以10个房间为样本,对10个医院高接触环境表面进行清洁前后的相对光单位(RLU) ATP读数和菌落形成单位(CFU)定量测定。在同一房间进行清洁后评估荧光标记(FM)的去除。方法采用相关分析进行比较。结果与各自洁净度标准相比,ATP读数通常高于CFU读数。RLU和CFU方法的洁净度评价变化方向一致(通常在清洁后下降)。此外,CFU和RLU值与清洗前相关,而与清洗后无关。受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线显示,ATP测定的“干净”截止值为8 RLU/cm2,高于最常用的2.5 RLU/cm2截止值。两种方法都不能很好地与FM结果相关。结论环境洁净度测量方法相关性不一致,测量参数不同。需要进一步的研究来评估这三种方法在房间洁净度评估中的相关性和预测价值。
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
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