B. Kieninger , R. Fechter , W. Bäumler , D. Raab , A. Rath , A. Caplunik-Pratsch , S. Schmid , T. Müller , W. Schneider-Brachert , A. Eichner
{"title":"光动力涂层能以较低的光强度杀死重症监护室中靠近病人表面的细菌。","authors":"B. Kieninger , R. Fechter , W. Bäumler , D. Raab , A. Rath , A. Caplunik-Pratsch , S. Schmid , T. Müller , W. Schneider-Brachert , A. Eichner","doi":"10.1016/j.jhin.2024.08.006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Surfaces in close proximity to patients within hospitals may cause healthcare-associated infections. These surfaces are repositories for pathogens facilitating their transmission among staff and patients. Regular cleaning and disinfection of these surfaces provides only a temporary elimination of pathogens with inevitable recontamination. Antimicrobial coatings (AMCs) of such surfaces may additionally reduce the risk of pathogen transmissions.</div></div><div><h3>Aim</h3><div>To evaluate the efficacy of a standard and a novel photodynamic AMC, even at very low light intensities, in a field study conducted in two ICUs at our university hospital.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>The microbial burden was determined on three coatings: standard photodynamic AMC (A), a novel photodynamic AMC (B), and an inactive AMC as control (C). The control coating C was identical to standard coating A, but it contained no photosensitizer. During a three-month period, 699 samples were collected from identical surfaces using eSwab and were analysed (cfu/cm<sup>2</sup>).</div></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><div>Mean values of all surfaces covered with control coating (C) showed a microbial burden of 5.5 ± 14.8 cfu/cm<sup>2</sup>. Photodynamic AMC showed significantly lower mean value of 1.6 ± 4.6 cfu/cm<sup>2</sup> (coating A; <em>P</em> < 0.001) and 2.7 ± 9.6 (coating B; <em>P</em> < 0.001). When considering a benchmark of 2.5 cfu/cm<sup>2</sup>, the relative risk for higher microbial counts was reduced by 52% (coating A) or 40% (coating B), respectively.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Both photodynamic AMCs offer a substantial, permanent risk reduction of microbial counts on near-patient surfaces in ICUs with low light intensities.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54806,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Hospital Infection","volume":"153 ","pages":"Pages 39-46"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Photodynamic coatings kill bacteria on near-patient surfaces in intensive care units with low light intensities\",\"authors\":\"B. Kieninger , R. Fechter , W. Bäumler , D. Raab , A. Rath , A. Caplunik-Pratsch , S. Schmid , T. Müller , W. Schneider-Brachert , A. Eichner\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jhin.2024.08.006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Surfaces in close proximity to patients within hospitals may cause healthcare-associated infections. These surfaces are repositories for pathogens facilitating their transmission among staff and patients. Regular cleaning and disinfection of these surfaces provides only a temporary elimination of pathogens with inevitable recontamination. Antimicrobial coatings (AMCs) of such surfaces may additionally reduce the risk of pathogen transmissions.</div></div><div><h3>Aim</h3><div>To evaluate the efficacy of a standard and a novel photodynamic AMC, even at very low light intensities, in a field study conducted in two ICUs at our university hospital.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>The microbial burden was determined on three coatings: standard photodynamic AMC (A), a novel photodynamic AMC (B), and an inactive AMC as control (C). The control coating C was identical to standard coating A, but it contained no photosensitizer. During a three-month period, 699 samples were collected from identical surfaces using eSwab and were analysed (cfu/cm<sup>2</sup>).</div></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><div>Mean values of all surfaces covered with control coating (C) showed a microbial burden of 5.5 ± 14.8 cfu/cm<sup>2</sup>. Photodynamic AMC showed significantly lower mean value of 1.6 ± 4.6 cfu/cm<sup>2</sup> (coating A; <em>P</em> < 0.001) and 2.7 ± 9.6 (coating B; <em>P</em> < 0.001). When considering a benchmark of 2.5 cfu/cm<sup>2</sup>, the relative risk for higher microbial counts was reduced by 52% (coating A) or 40% (coating B), respectively.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Both photodynamic AMCs offer a substantial, permanent risk reduction of microbial counts on near-patient surfaces in ICUs with low light intensities.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54806,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Hospital Infection\",\"volume\":\"153 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 39-46\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Hospital Infection\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S019567012400286X\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Hospital Infection","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S019567012400286X","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Photodynamic coatings kill bacteria on near-patient surfaces in intensive care units with low light intensities
Background
Surfaces in close proximity to patients within hospitals may cause healthcare-associated infections. These surfaces are repositories for pathogens facilitating their transmission among staff and patients. Regular cleaning and disinfection of these surfaces provides only a temporary elimination of pathogens with inevitable recontamination. Antimicrobial coatings (AMCs) of such surfaces may additionally reduce the risk of pathogen transmissions.
Aim
To evaluate the efficacy of a standard and a novel photodynamic AMC, even at very low light intensities, in a field study conducted in two ICUs at our university hospital.
Methods
The microbial burden was determined on three coatings: standard photodynamic AMC (A), a novel photodynamic AMC (B), and an inactive AMC as control (C). The control coating C was identical to standard coating A, but it contained no photosensitizer. During a three-month period, 699 samples were collected from identical surfaces using eSwab and were analysed (cfu/cm2).
Findings
Mean values of all surfaces covered with control coating (C) showed a microbial burden of 5.5 ± 14.8 cfu/cm2. Photodynamic AMC showed significantly lower mean value of 1.6 ± 4.6 cfu/cm2 (coating A; P < 0.001) and 2.7 ± 9.6 (coating B; P < 0.001). When considering a benchmark of 2.5 cfu/cm2, the relative risk for higher microbial counts was reduced by 52% (coating A) or 40% (coating B), respectively.
Conclusion
Both photodynamic AMCs offer a substantial, permanent risk reduction of microbial counts on near-patient surfaces in ICUs with low light intensities.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Hospital Infection is the editorially independent scientific publication of the Healthcare Infection Society. The aim of the Journal is to publish high quality research and information relating to infection prevention and control that is relevant to an international audience.
The Journal welcomes submissions that relate to all aspects of infection prevention and control in healthcare settings. This includes submissions that:
provide new insight into the epidemiology, surveillance, or prevention and control of healthcare-associated infections and antimicrobial resistance in healthcare settings;
provide new insight into cleaning, disinfection and decontamination;
provide new insight into the design of healthcare premises;
describe novel aspects of outbreaks of infection;
throw light on techniques for effective antimicrobial stewardship;
describe novel techniques (laboratory-based or point of care) for the detection of infection or antimicrobial resistance in the healthcare setting, particularly if these can be used to facilitate infection prevention and control;
improve understanding of the motivations of safe healthcare behaviour, or describe techniques for achieving behavioural and cultural change;
improve understanding of the use of IT systems in infection surveillance and prevention and control.