Q. Liu , X. Wang , L. Jiang, Y. Fan, F. Gao, Y. Wu, L. Xiong
{"title":"222nm UVC与254nm UVC的消毒效果和安全性比较:系统评价和meta分析。","authors":"Q. Liu , X. Wang , L. Jiang, Y. Fan, F. Gao, Y. Wu, L. Xiong","doi":"10.1016/j.jhin.2025.04.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Some studies have indicated that disinfection with 222-nm ultraviolet C (UVC) is more effective than that with 254-nm UVC; however, other studies have reported the opposite. Moreover, additional studies have reported that 222-nm UVC exposure is safe for the skin and eyes. This study aimed to identify and quantitatively synthesize all studies evaluating the disinfection efficacy and safety of 222-nm UVC compared with 254-nm UVC. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. Web of Science, SCOPUS, Medline, Ovid Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched through November 2024 for studies that evaluated the disinfection efficacy and safety of 222-nm UVC compared with 254-nm UVC. We identified 25 eligible publications including 15 publications providing data only on the efficacy, seven only on the safety, and the remaining three on both efficacy and safety. The pooled odds ratio for studies comparing the efficacy of 222-nm UVC with that of 254-nm UVC was 1.382 (95% CI: 1.153–1.656, <em>N</em> = 18 publications with 87 studies), indicating that 222-nm UVC is more effective for disinfection. The pooled risk difference for studies evaluating the safety of 222-nm UVC radiation was -0.211 (95% CI: -0.245, -0.177; <em>N</em> = 10 publications with 29 studies), which indicates that the proportion of normal cells producing cyclobutane pyrimidine dimers via 222-nm UVC is 21.1% less than that via 254-nm. Compared with 254-nm UVC, 222-nm UVC not only exhibits comparable or potentially superior efficacy in disinfecting diverse micro-organisms but also causes less DNA damage to the mammalian cells.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54806,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Hospital Infection","volume":"161 ","pages":"Pages 55-67"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Disinfection efficacy and safety of 222-nm ultraviolet C compared with 254-nm ultraviolet C: systematic review and meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Q. Liu , X. Wang , L. Jiang, Y. Fan, F. Gao, Y. Wu, L. Xiong\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jhin.2025.04.004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Some studies have indicated that disinfection with 222-nm ultraviolet C (UVC) is more effective than that with 254-nm UVC; however, other studies have reported the opposite. Moreover, additional studies have reported that 222-nm UVC exposure is safe for the skin and eyes. This study aimed to identify and quantitatively synthesize all studies evaluating the disinfection efficacy and safety of 222-nm UVC compared with 254-nm UVC. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. Web of Science, SCOPUS, Medline, Ovid Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched through November 2024 for studies that evaluated the disinfection efficacy and safety of 222-nm UVC compared with 254-nm UVC. We identified 25 eligible publications including 15 publications providing data only on the efficacy, seven only on the safety, and the remaining three on both efficacy and safety. The pooled odds ratio for studies comparing the efficacy of 222-nm UVC with that of 254-nm UVC was 1.382 (95% CI: 1.153–1.656, <em>N</em> = 18 publications with 87 studies), indicating that 222-nm UVC is more effective for disinfection. The pooled risk difference for studies evaluating the safety of 222-nm UVC radiation was -0.211 (95% CI: -0.245, -0.177; <em>N</em> = 10 publications with 29 studies), which indicates that the proportion of normal cells producing cyclobutane pyrimidine dimers via 222-nm UVC is 21.1% less than that via 254-nm. Compared with 254-nm UVC, 222-nm UVC not only exhibits comparable or potentially superior efficacy in disinfecting diverse micro-organisms but also causes less DNA damage to the mammalian cells.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54806,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Hospital Infection\",\"volume\":\"161 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 55-67\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-18\",\"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/S0195670125000921\",\"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/S0195670125000921","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Disinfection efficacy and safety of 222-nm ultraviolet C compared with 254-nm ultraviolet C: systematic review and meta-analysis
Some studies have indicated that disinfection with 222-nm ultraviolet C (UVC) is more effective than that with 254-nm UVC; however, other studies have reported the opposite. Moreover, additional studies have reported that 222-nm UVC exposure is safe for the skin and eyes. This study aimed to identify and quantitatively synthesize all studies evaluating the disinfection efficacy and safety of 222-nm UVC compared with 254-nm UVC. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. Web of Science, SCOPUS, Medline, Ovid Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched through November 2024 for studies that evaluated the disinfection efficacy and safety of 222-nm UVC compared with 254-nm UVC. We identified 25 eligible publications including 15 publications providing data only on the efficacy, seven only on the safety, and the remaining three on both efficacy and safety. The pooled odds ratio for studies comparing the efficacy of 222-nm UVC with that of 254-nm UVC was 1.382 (95% CI: 1.153–1.656, N = 18 publications with 87 studies), indicating that 222-nm UVC is more effective for disinfection. The pooled risk difference for studies evaluating the safety of 222-nm UVC radiation was -0.211 (95% CI: -0.245, -0.177; N = 10 publications with 29 studies), which indicates that the proportion of normal cells producing cyclobutane pyrimidine dimers via 222-nm UVC is 21.1% less than that via 254-nm. Compared with 254-nm UVC, 222-nm UVC not only exhibits comparable or potentially superior efficacy in disinfecting diverse micro-organisms but also causes less DNA damage to the mammalian cells.
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.