308
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      How long do nosocomial pathogens persist on inanimate surfaces? A systematic review

      research-article
      1 , , 2 , 1 , 3
      BMC Infectious Diseases
      BioMed Central

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Inanimate surfaces have often been described as the source for outbreaks of nosocomial infections. The aim of this review is to summarize data on the persistence of different nosocomial pathogens on inanimate surfaces.

          Methods

          The literature was systematically reviewed in MedLine without language restrictions. In addition, cited articles in a report were assessed and standard textbooks on the topic were reviewed. All reports with experimental evidence on the duration of persistence of a nosocomial pathogen on any type of surface were included.

          Results

          Most gram-positive bacteria, such as Enterococcus spp. (including VRE), Staphylococcus aureus (including MRSA), or Streptococcus pyogenes, survive for months on dry surfaces. Many gram-negative species, such as Acinetobacter spp., Escherichia coli, Klebsiella spp., Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Serratia marcescens, or Shigella spp., can also survive for months. A few others, such as Bordetella pertussis, Haemophilus influenzae, Proteus vulgaris, or Vibrio cholerae, however, persist only for days. Mycobacteria, including Mycobacterium tuberculosis, and spore-forming bacteria, including Clostridium difficile, can also survive for months on surfaces. Candida albicans as the most important nosocomial fungal pathogen can survive up to 4 months on surfaces. Persistence of other yeasts, such as Torulopsis glabrata, was described to be similar (5 months) or shorter ( Candida parapsilosis, 14 days). Most viruses from the respiratory tract, such as corona, coxsackie, influenza, SARS or rhino virus, can persist on surfaces for a few days. Viruses from the gastrointestinal tract, such as astrovirus, HAV, polio- or rota virus, persist for approximately 2 months. Blood-borne viruses, such as HBV or HIV, can persist for more than one week. Herpes viruses, such as CMV or HSV type 1 and 2, have been shown to persist from only a few hours up to 7 days.

          Conclusion

          The most common nosocomial pathogens may well survive or persist on surfaces for months and can thereby be a continuous source of transmission if no regular preventive surface disinfection is performed.

          Related collections

          Most cited references162

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Stability of SARS coronavirus in human specimens and environment and its sensitivity to heating and UV irradiation.

          The causal agent for SARS is considered as a novel coronavirus that has never been described both in human and animals previously. The stability of SARS coronavirus in human specimens and in environments was studied. Using a SARS coronavirus strain CoV-P9, which was isolated from pharyngeal swab of a probable SARS case in Beijing, its stability in mimic human specimens and in mimic environment including surfaces of commonly used materials or in household conditions, as well as its resistance to temperature and UV irradiation were analyzed. A total of 10(6) TCID50 viruses were placed in each tested condition, and changes of the viral infectivity in samples after treatments were measured by evaluating cytopathic effect (CPE) in cell line Vero-E6 at 48 h after infection. The results showed that SARS coronavirus in the testing condition could survive in serum, 1:20 diluted sputum and feces for at least 96 h, whereas it could remain alive in urine for at least 72 h with a low level of infectivity. The survival abilities on the surfaces of eight different materials and in water were quite comparable, revealing reduction of infectivity after 72 to 96 h exposure. Viruses stayed stable at 4 degrees C, at room temperature (20 degrees C) and at 37 degrees C for at least 2 h without remarkable change in the infectious ability in cells, but were converted to be non-infectious after 90-, 60- and 30-min exposure at 56 degrees C, at 67 degrees C and at 75 degrees C, respectively. Irradiation of UV for 60 min on the virus in culture medium resulted in the destruction of viral infectivity at an undetectable level. The survival ability of SARS coronavirus in human specimens and in environments seems to be relatively strong. Heating and UV irradiation can efficiently eliminate the viral infectivity.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Epidemiologic background of hand hygiene and evaluation of the most important agents for scrubs and rubs.

            The etiology of nosocomial infections, the frequency of contaminated hands with the different nosocomial pathogens, and the role of health care workers' hands during outbreaks suggest that a hand hygiene preparation should at least have activity against bacteria, yeasts, and coated viruses. The importance of efficacy in choosing the right hand hygiene product is reflected in the new Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guideline on hand hygiene (J. M. Boyce and D. Pittet, Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep. 51:1-45, 2002). The best antimicrobial efficacy can be achieved with ethanol (60 to 85%), isopropanol (60 to 80%), and n-propanol (60 to 80%). The activity is broad and immediate. Ethanol at high concentrations (e.g., 95%) is the most effective treatment against naked viruses, whereas n-propanol seems to be more effective against the resident bacterial flora. The combination of alcohols may have a synergistic effect. The antimicrobial efficacy of chlorhexidine (2 to 4%) and triclosan (1 to 2%) is both lower and slower. Additionally, both agents have a risk of bacterial resistance, which is higher for chlorhexidine than triclosan. Their activity is often supported by the mechanical removal of pathogens during hand washing. Taking the antimicrobial efficacy and the mechanical removal together, they are still less effective than the alcohols. Plain soap and water has the lowest efficacy of all. In the new Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guideline, promotion of alcohol-based hand rubs containing various emollients instead of irritating soaps and detergents is one strategy to reduce skin damage, dryness, and irritation. Irritant contact dermatitis is highest with preparations containing 4% chlorhexidine gluconate, less frequent with nonantimicrobial soaps and preparations containing lower concentrations of chlorhexidine gluconate, and lowest with well-formulated alcohol-based hand rubs containing emollients and other skin conditioners. Too few published data from comparative trials are available to reliably rank triclosan. Personnel should be reminded that it is neither necessary nor recommended to routinely wash hands after each application of an alcohol-based hand rub. Long-lasting improvement of compliance with hand hygiene protocols can be successful if an effective and accessible alcohol-based hand rub with a proven dermal tolerance and an excellent user acceptability is supplied, accompanied by education of health care workers and promotion of the use of the product.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Contamination, Disinfection, and Cross-Colonization: Are Hospital Surfaces Reservoirs for Nosocomial Infection?

              Abstract Despite documentation that the inanimate hospital environment (e.g., surfaces and medical equipment) becomes contaminated with nosocomial pathogens, the data that suggest that contaminated fomites lead to nosocomial infections do so indirectly. Pathogens for which there is more-compelling evidence of survival in environmental reservoirs include Clostridium difficile, vancomycin-resistant enterococci, and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, and pathogens for which there is evidence of probable survival in environmental reservoirs include norovirus, influenza virus, severe acute respiratory syndrome—associated coronavirus, and Candida species. Strategies to reduce the rates of nosocomial infection with these pathogens should conform to established guidelines, with an emphasis on thorough environmental cleaning and use of Environmental Protection Agency—approved detergent-disinfectants.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMC Infect Dis
                BMC Infectious Diseases
                BioMed Central (London )
                1471-2334
                2006
                16 August 2006
                : 6
                : 130
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Institut für Hygiene und Umweltmedizin, Ernst-Moritz-Arndt Universität, Greifswald, Germany
                [2 ]Robert-Koch Institut, Berlin, Germany
                [3 ]Bode Chemie GmbH & Co. KG, Scientific Affairs, Hamburg, Germany
                Article
                1471-2334-6-130
                10.1186/1471-2334-6-130
                1564025
                16914034
                021964c0-e4f6-41ef-9b95-8829cb2f06fe
                Copyright © 2006 Kramer et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 26 April 2006
                : 16 August 2006
                Categories
                Research Article

                Infectious disease & Microbiology
                Infectious disease & Microbiology

                Comments

                Comment on this article