Acetic Acid Versus Chlorine Tablet Solution as Disinfectant of Non-Critical Environmental Surfaces

Abegail Sales Basco
{"title":"Acetic Acid Versus Chlorine Tablet Solution as Disinfectant of Non-Critical Environmental Surfaces","authors":"Abegail Sales Basco","doi":"10.56964/pidspj20212202012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: This study aims to determine the bactericidal activity of 4% acetic acid versus chlorine tablets against gram negative and gram-positive microorganisms based on percentage reduction of microorganisms in hospital surfaces and suggest that it may be an effective alternative disinfectant. Methodology: This was an experimental study where microbiological sampling of hospital surfaces was used to determine bacterial growth. The study was conducted from November to December 2020 at National Children’s Hospital, a 200 bed capacity tertiary government hospital catering to children 0 to less than 19 years old. Non-critical hospital surfaces such as beds, bed rails and bedside tables were swabbed before and after intervention cleaning with chlorine tablets or 4% acetic acid solution. Result: Pre-swabbing, hospital surfaces showed the presence of Bacillus sp., Klebsiella pneumoniae and Coagulase Negative Staphylococcus (CONS). Post-application of 4% acetic acid solution resulted to 100% reduction of Bacillus sp., 70.8% reduction of CONS, and 19.5% reduction of Klebsiella pneumoniae while post-application of chlorine tablet solution showed 100% reduction of Klebsiella pneumoniae and CONS and 95.2% reduction of Bacillus species. Conclusion: The use of 4% acetic acid solution significantly reduced more gram-positive than gram-negative organisms and is a highly effective disinfectant against Bacillus sp. but is not effective against gram-negative organisms as it does not fulfil the criteria of at least 90 percent reduction in bacterial growth. Chlorine tablet solution is a more effective disinfectant against gram-negative organisms than gram-positive organisms. Acetic acid 4% solution is not an effective alternative disinfectant to chlorine tablet solution, the currently used hospital disinfectant, but maybe used as an adjunct for better reduction of hospital environmental pathogens.","PeriodicalId":117545,"journal":{"name":"Pediatric Infectious Disease Society of the Philippines Journal","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pediatric Infectious Disease Society of the Philippines Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56964/pidspj20212202012","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: This study aims to determine the bactericidal activity of 4% acetic acid versus chlorine tablets against gram negative and gram-positive microorganisms based on percentage reduction of microorganisms in hospital surfaces and suggest that it may be an effective alternative disinfectant. Methodology: This was an experimental study where microbiological sampling of hospital surfaces was used to determine bacterial growth. The study was conducted from November to December 2020 at National Children’s Hospital, a 200 bed capacity tertiary government hospital catering to children 0 to less than 19 years old. Non-critical hospital surfaces such as beds, bed rails and bedside tables were swabbed before and after intervention cleaning with chlorine tablets or 4% acetic acid solution. Result: Pre-swabbing, hospital surfaces showed the presence of Bacillus sp., Klebsiella pneumoniae and Coagulase Negative Staphylococcus (CONS). Post-application of 4% acetic acid solution resulted to 100% reduction of Bacillus sp., 70.8% reduction of CONS, and 19.5% reduction of Klebsiella pneumoniae while post-application of chlorine tablet solution showed 100% reduction of Klebsiella pneumoniae and CONS and 95.2% reduction of Bacillus species. Conclusion: The use of 4% acetic acid solution significantly reduced more gram-positive than gram-negative organisms and is a highly effective disinfectant against Bacillus sp. but is not effective against gram-negative organisms as it does not fulfil the criteria of at least 90 percent reduction in bacterial growth. Chlorine tablet solution is a more effective disinfectant against gram-negative organisms than gram-positive organisms. Acetic acid 4% solution is not an effective alternative disinfectant to chlorine tablet solution, the currently used hospital disinfectant, but maybe used as an adjunct for better reduction of hospital environmental pathogens.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
醋酸与氯片剂溶液对非临界环境表面消毒剂的影响
目的:通过对医院表面微生物减少率的研究,确定4%乙酸对氯片对革兰氏阴性和革兰氏阳性微生物的杀菌活性,提示其可能是一种有效的替代消毒剂。方法:这是一项实验研究,利用医院表面的微生物取样来确定细菌的生长。该研究于2020年11月至12月在国立儿童医院进行,这是一家拥有200张床位的三级政府医院,为0至19岁以下的儿童提供服务。在干预清洁前后用氯片或4%醋酸溶液擦拭医院非关键表面,如床、床轨、床头柜等。结果:医院表面预拭检出芽孢杆菌、肺炎克雷伯菌和凝固酶阴性葡萄球菌。4%醋酸溶液处理后,芽孢杆菌减少100%,con减少70.8%,肺炎克雷伯菌减少19.5%;氯片溶液处理后,肺炎克雷伯菌和con减少100%,芽孢杆菌减少95.2%。结论:4%醋酸溶液对革兰氏阳性菌的抑制作用明显大于革兰氏阴性菌,对革兰氏阴性菌的抑菌效果较好,但对革兰氏阴性菌的抑菌效果较差,不能达到抑菌90%以上的标准。氯片溶液对革兰氏阴性菌比革兰氏阳性菌更有效。醋酸4%溶液不是目前医院常用的氯片溶液的有效替代消毒剂,但可能作为一种辅助消毒剂更好地减少医院环境病原体。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Clinical Profile and Treatment Outcomes Of Acute Cholangitis in Children in a Tertiary Government Hospital in the Philippines: A Five-Year Retrospective Study. SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR cycle threshold value and its association with disease severity and mortality among hospitalized pediatric covid-19 patients. Clinical and Microbiological Profile and Factors Affecting Outcome among Pediatric Febrile Neutropenic Patients with Hematologic Malignancies. Aye, AI Captain! The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Immunoglobulin (IgG) Levels Using Chemiluminescence Immunoassay (CLIA) Anti-S-RBD Test in Term Neonates Born to COVID-19 Fully Vaccinated Mothers
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1