Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Two-step or one-step - are all methods for neonatal incubator decontamination equal?
Watkin, S; Dunn, H; Ready, D; Rennie, K; Soares, A; Ciric, L; Cloutman-Green, E.
Afiliação
  • Watkin S; Department of Civil, Environmental and Geomatic Engineering, University College London, London, UK. Electronic address: uceswat@ucl.ac.uk.
  • Dunn H; Microbiology, Virology and Infection Prevention and Control, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
  • Ready D; Health Protection Operations, South West, UK Health Security Agency, UK; NIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Behavioural Science and Evaluation at University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
  • Rennie K; Microbiology, Virology and Infection Prevention and Control, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
  • Soares A; Estates and Facilities, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
  • Ciric L; Department of Civil, Environmental and Geomatic Engineering, University College London, London, UK.
  • Cloutman-Green E; Department of Civil, Environmental and Geomatic Engineering, University College London, London, UK; Microbiology, Virology and Infection Prevention and Control, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
J Hosp Infect ; 153: 50-54, 2024 Aug 06.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39098394
ABSTRACT
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.
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: J Hosp Infect / J. hosp. infect / Journal of Hospital Infection Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: J Hosp Infect / J. hosp. infect / Journal of Hospital Infection Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article