Joseph Okebe, Atana Ewa, Ememobong Aquaisua, Obasesam A Ikpi, Ella Olughu, Ebere C Chukwuemelie, Chukwudi Oringanje, Tochi Okwor, Martin Meremikwu
{"title":"Disinfection methods for preventing COVID-19 infections in healthcare settings: A rapid review.","authors":"Joseph Okebe, Atana Ewa, Ememobong Aquaisua, Obasesam A Ikpi, Ella Olughu, Ebere C Chukwuemelie, Chukwudi Oringanje, Tochi Okwor, Martin Meremikwu","doi":"10.4102/jphia.v16i2.588","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Disinfectant sprays and wipes reduce the risk of infection from contaminated surfaces and materials in healthcare facilities. To support guideline updates, evidence on surface disinfection against the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection are needed.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>This study aims to compare the effect of disinfection by spraying or wiping on the risk of human infections in healthcare facilities providing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) services.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Healthcare settings providing care for patients with COVID-19 or where exposure risk to COVID-19 is high.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We searched the Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and Cochrane Database of systematic review; PubMed, EMBASE and EPOC databases from 01 January 2020 to 31 August 2022. Results were screened for eligibility, the risk of bias in included studies assessed, and the certainty of evidence defined using GRADE<sup>®</sup>.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Three observational studies were included. Two studies reporting proportion of surfaces with residual contamination, showed contrasting results with spraying more effective (0%, [<i>n</i> = 0/39] vs. 25.6% [<i>n</i> = 23/90]) in one study but less effective (25.0% [<i>n</i> = 12/48] vs. 48.2% [<i>n</i> = 13/27]) in the other. The third study reported higher reductions from wiping (88.0%) compared to spraying (15.1%). The risk of bias ranged from moderate to serious and the certainty of the evidence was very low. No study reported a direct effect on the risk of infection in humans.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both spraying and wiping methods may protect against SARS-CoV-2 infections indirectly by reducing residual surface contamination.</p><p><strong>Contribution: </strong>The use of both methods of disinfection in cleaning protocols indirectly reduces residual surface contamination.</p>","PeriodicalId":44723,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Health in Africa","volume":"16 2","pages":"588"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11905173/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Public Health in Africa","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4102/jphia.v16i2.588","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Disinfectant sprays and wipes reduce the risk of infection from contaminated surfaces and materials in healthcare facilities. To support guideline updates, evidence on surface disinfection against the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection are needed.
Aim: This study aims to compare the effect of disinfection by spraying or wiping on the risk of human infections in healthcare facilities providing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) services.
Setting: Healthcare settings providing care for patients with COVID-19 or where exposure risk to COVID-19 is high.
Method: We searched the Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and Cochrane Database of systematic review; PubMed, EMBASE and EPOC databases from 01 January 2020 to 31 August 2022. Results were screened for eligibility, the risk of bias in included studies assessed, and the certainty of evidence defined using GRADE®.
Results: Three observational studies were included. Two studies reporting proportion of surfaces with residual contamination, showed contrasting results with spraying more effective (0%, [n = 0/39] vs. 25.6% [n = 23/90]) in one study but less effective (25.0% [n = 12/48] vs. 48.2% [n = 13/27]) in the other. The third study reported higher reductions from wiping (88.0%) compared to spraying (15.1%). The risk of bias ranged from moderate to serious and the certainty of the evidence was very low. No study reported a direct effect on the risk of infection in humans.
Conclusion: Both spraying and wiping methods may protect against SARS-CoV-2 infections indirectly by reducing residual surface contamination.
Contribution: The use of both methods of disinfection in cleaning protocols indirectly reduces residual surface contamination.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Public Health in Africa (JPHiA) is a peer-reviewed, academic journal that focuses on health issues in the African continent. The journal editors seek high quality original articles on public health related issues, reviews, comments and more. The aim of the journal is to move public health discourse from the background to the forefront. The success of Africa’s struggle against disease depends on public health approaches.