S. Watkin , H. Dunn , D. Ready , K. Rennie , A. Soares , L. Ciric , E. Cloutman-Green
{"title":"两步法还是一步法--新生儿培养箱净化的所有方法都一样吗?","authors":"S. Watkin , H. Dunn , D. Ready , K. Rennie , A. Soares , L. Ciric , E. Cloutman-Green","doi":"10.1016/j.jhin.2024.07.012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Healthcare-associated pathogens, including <em>Staphylococcus capitis</em>, can contaminate incubator surfaces and are of significant concern in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs). Effective incubator decontamination is essential for infection prevention and control, with submersion decontamination often recommended. This may not always be achievable, with wipe decontamination seen as an alternative. Here we compare the ability of a two-step (submersion in enzymatic detergent followed by wiping with hypochlorite-based wipes) with a one-step (wiping with quaternary ammonium compound-impregnated wipes) decontamination procedure to remove microbial surrogate markers from neonatal incubator surfaces. Three cauliflower-mosaic-virus-derived microbial surrogate markers were inoculated on to the fan, a mattress seam and the external arm port door clips of two Giraffe™ Omnibed™ Carestation™ incubators. Incubators were decontaminated either by the one-step or the two-step decontamination process. Swab samples were collected from 28 sites on each incubator and surrounding environment, with marker presence determined by qPCR. Following two-step decontamination, three of 28 (11%) sample sites were positive for any marker, compared with 12 of 28 (43%) after one-step decontamination. Markers were transferred to several incubator surfaces and recovered from the originally inoculated sites following one-step decontamination, with the marker inoculated on door clips having the greatest transfer. Markers inoculated on to the mattress persisted through both decontamination strategies. In conclusion, microbial surrogate markers were not completely removed from incubator surfaces by one-step decontamination alone. Two-step decontamination was the most effective method and removed markers from submergible surfaces, but not from the mattress. These findings indicate that micro-organisms can persist after incubator terminal decontamination, particularly on mattresses and when a two-step decontamination process is not used. This highlights the importance of effective decontamination practices to mitigate micro-organism persistence on incubator surfaces.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54806,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Hospital Infection","volume":"153 ","pages":"Pages 50-54"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Two-step or one-step – are all methods for neonatal incubator decontamination equal?\",\"authors\":\"S. Watkin , H. Dunn , D. Ready , K. Rennie , A. Soares , L. Ciric , E. Cloutman-Green\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jhin.2024.07.012\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Healthcare-associated pathogens, including <em>Staphylococcus capitis</em>, can contaminate incubator surfaces and are of significant concern in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs). Effective incubator decontamination is essential for infection prevention and control, with submersion decontamination often recommended. This may not always be achievable, with wipe decontamination seen as an alternative. Here we compare the ability of a two-step (submersion in enzymatic detergent followed by wiping with hypochlorite-based wipes) with a one-step (wiping with quaternary ammonium compound-impregnated wipes) decontamination procedure to remove microbial surrogate markers from neonatal incubator surfaces. Three cauliflower-mosaic-virus-derived microbial surrogate markers were inoculated on to the fan, a mattress seam and the external arm port door clips of two Giraffe™ Omnibed™ Carestation™ incubators. Incubators were decontaminated either by the one-step or the two-step decontamination process. Swab samples were collected from 28 sites on each incubator and surrounding environment, with marker presence determined by qPCR. Following two-step decontamination, three of 28 (11%) sample sites were positive for any marker, compared with 12 of 28 (43%) after one-step decontamination. Markers were transferred to several incubator surfaces and recovered from the originally inoculated sites following one-step decontamination, with the marker inoculated on door clips having the greatest transfer. Markers inoculated on to the mattress persisted through both decontamination strategies. In conclusion, microbial surrogate markers were not completely removed from incubator surfaces by one-step decontamination alone. Two-step decontamination was the most effective method and removed markers from submergible surfaces, but not from the mattress. These findings indicate that micro-organisms can persist after incubator terminal decontamination, particularly on mattresses and when a two-step decontamination process is not used. This highlights the importance of effective decontamination practices to mitigate micro-organism persistence on incubator surfaces.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54806,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Hospital Infection\",\"volume\":\"153 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 50-54\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Hospital Infection\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195670124002652\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Hospital Infection","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195670124002652","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Two-step or one-step – are all methods for neonatal incubator decontamination equal?
Healthcare-associated pathogens, including Staphylococcus capitis, can contaminate incubator surfaces and are of significant concern in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs). Effective incubator decontamination is essential for infection prevention and control, with submersion decontamination often recommended. This may not always be achievable, with wipe decontamination seen as an alternative. Here we compare the ability of a two-step (submersion in enzymatic detergent followed by wiping with hypochlorite-based wipes) with a one-step (wiping with quaternary ammonium compound-impregnated wipes) decontamination procedure to remove microbial surrogate markers from neonatal incubator surfaces. Three cauliflower-mosaic-virus-derived microbial surrogate markers were inoculated on to the fan, a mattress seam and the external arm port door clips of two Giraffe™ Omnibed™ Carestation™ incubators. Incubators were decontaminated either by the one-step or the two-step decontamination process. Swab samples were collected from 28 sites on each incubator and surrounding environment, with marker presence determined by qPCR. Following two-step decontamination, three of 28 (11%) sample sites were positive for any marker, compared with 12 of 28 (43%) after one-step decontamination. Markers were transferred to several incubator surfaces and recovered from the originally inoculated sites following one-step decontamination, with the marker inoculated on door clips having the greatest transfer. Markers inoculated on to the mattress persisted through both decontamination strategies. In conclusion, microbial surrogate markers were not completely removed from incubator surfaces by one-step decontamination alone. Two-step decontamination was the most effective method and removed markers from submergible surfaces, but not from the mattress. These findings indicate that micro-organisms can persist after incubator terminal decontamination, particularly on mattresses and when a two-step decontamination process is not used. This highlights the importance of effective decontamination practices to mitigate micro-organism persistence on incubator surfaces.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Hospital Infection is the editorially independent scientific publication of the Healthcare Infection Society. The aim of the Journal is to publish high quality research and information relating to infection prevention and control that is relevant to an international audience.
The Journal welcomes submissions that relate to all aspects of infection prevention and control in healthcare settings. This includes submissions that:
provide new insight into the epidemiology, surveillance, or prevention and control of healthcare-associated infections and antimicrobial resistance in healthcare settings;
provide new insight into cleaning, disinfection and decontamination;
provide new insight into the design of healthcare premises;
describe novel aspects of outbreaks of infection;
throw light on techniques for effective antimicrobial stewardship;
describe novel techniques (laboratory-based or point of care) for the detection of infection or antimicrobial resistance in the healthcare setting, particularly if these can be used to facilitate infection prevention and control;
improve understanding of the motivations of safe healthcare behaviour, or describe techniques for achieving behavioural and cultural change;
improve understanding of the use of IT systems in infection surveillance and prevention and control.