Methods to assess antibacterial, antifungal and antiviral surfaces in relation to touch and droplet transfer: a review, gap-analysis and suggested approaches.

To help assess whether a potentially antimicrobial material, surface, or coating provides antimicrobial efficacy, a number of standardised test methods have been developed internationally. Ideally, these methods should generate data that supports the materials efficacy when deployed in the intended end-use application. These methods can be categorised based on their methodological approach such as suspension tests, agar plate/zone diffusion tests, surface inoculation tests, surface growth tests or surface adhesion tests. To support those interested in antimicrobial coating efficacy, this review brings together an exhaustive list of methods (for porous and non-porous materials), exploring the methodological and environmental parameters used to quantify antibacterial, antifungal, or antiviral activity. This analysis demonstrates that antimicrobial efficacy methods that test either fungi or viruses are generally lacking, whilst methods that test bacteria, fungi and viruses are not designed to simulate end-use/lack realistic conditions. As such, a number of applications for antimicrobial activity across medical touch screens, medical textiles and gloves and transport seat textiles are explored as example applications, providing guidance on modifications to existing methods that may better simulate the intended end-use of antimicrobial materials.

How Do We Determine the Efficacy of an Antibacterial Surface? A Review of Standardised Antibacterial Material Testing Methods.

Materials that confer antimicrobial activity, be that by innate property, leaching of biocides or design features (e.g., non-adhesive materials) continue to gain popularity to combat the increasing and varied threats from microorganisms, e.g., replacing inert surfaces in hospitals with copper. To understand how efficacious these materials are at controlling microorganisms, data is usually collected via a standardised test method. However, standardised test methods vary, and often the characteristics and methodological choices can make it difficult to infer that any perceived antimicrobial activity demonstrated in the laboratory can be confidently assumed to an end-use setting. This review provides a critical analysis of standardised methodology used in academia and industry, and demonstrates how many key methodological choices (e.g., temperature, humidity/moisture, airflow, surface topography) may impact efficacy assessment, highlighting the need to carefully consider intended antimicrobial end-use of any product.