电梯按钮是医院中未被识别的细菌定植来源。

Open medicine : a peer-reviewed, independent, open-access journal Pub Date : 2014-07-08 eCollection Date: 2014-01-01
Christopher E Kandel, Andrew E Simor, Donald A Redelmeier
{"title":"电梯按钮是医院中未被识别的细菌定植来源。","authors":"Christopher E Kandel,&nbsp;Andrew E Simor,&nbsp;Donald A Redelmeier","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Elevators are ubiquitous and active inside hospitals, potentially facilitating bacterial transmission. The objective of this study was to estimate the prevalence of bacterial colonization on elevator buttons in large urban teaching hospitals.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 120 elevator buttons and 96 toilet surfaces were swabbed over separate intervals at 3 tertiary care hospitals on weekdays and weekends in Toronto, Ontario. For the elevators, swabs were taken from 2 interior buttons (buttons for the ground floor and one randomly selected upper-level floor) and 2 exterior buttons (the \"up\" button from the ground floor and the \"down\" button from the upper-level floor). For the toilet surfaces, swabs were taken from the exterior and interior handles of the entry door, the privacy latch, and the toilet flusher. Samples were obtained using standard bacterial collection techniques, followed by plating, culture, and species identification by a technician blind to sample source.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The prevalence of colonization of elevator buttons was 61% (95% confidence interval 52%-70%). No significant differences in colonization prevalence were apparent in relation to location of the buttons, day of the week, or panel position within the elevator. Coagulase-negative staphylococci were the most common organisms cultured, whereas Enterococcus and Pseudomonas species were infrequent. Elevator buttons had a higher prevalence of colonization than toilet surfaces (61% v. 43%, p = 0.008).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Hospital elevator buttons were commonly colonized by bacteria, although most pathogens were not clinically relevant. The risk of pathogen transmission might be reduced by simple countermeasures.</p>","PeriodicalId":88624,"journal":{"name":"Open medicine : a peer-reviewed, independent, open-access journal","volume":"8 3","pages":"e81-6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/ff/c2/OpenMed-08-81.PMC4242253.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Elevator buttons as unrecognized sources of bacterial colonization in hospitals.\",\"authors\":\"Christopher E Kandel,&nbsp;Andrew E Simor,&nbsp;Donald A Redelmeier\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Elevators are ubiquitous and active inside hospitals, potentially facilitating bacterial transmission. The objective of this study was to estimate the prevalence of bacterial colonization on elevator buttons in large urban teaching hospitals.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 120 elevator buttons and 96 toilet surfaces were swabbed over separate intervals at 3 tertiary care hospitals on weekdays and weekends in Toronto, Ontario. For the elevators, swabs were taken from 2 interior buttons (buttons for the ground floor and one randomly selected upper-level floor) and 2 exterior buttons (the \\\"up\\\" button from the ground floor and the \\\"down\\\" button from the upper-level floor). For the toilet surfaces, swabs were taken from the exterior and interior handles of the entry door, the privacy latch, and the toilet flusher. Samples were obtained using standard bacterial collection techniques, followed by plating, culture, and species identification by a technician blind to sample source.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The prevalence of colonization of elevator buttons was 61% (95% confidence interval 52%-70%). No significant differences in colonization prevalence were apparent in relation to location of the buttons, day of the week, or panel position within the elevator. Coagulase-negative staphylococci were the most common organisms cultured, whereas Enterococcus and Pseudomonas species were infrequent. Elevator buttons had a higher prevalence of colonization than toilet surfaces (61% v. 43%, p = 0.008).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Hospital elevator buttons were commonly colonized by bacteria, although most pathogens were not clinically relevant. The risk of pathogen transmission might be reduced by simple countermeasures.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":88624,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Open medicine : a peer-reviewed, independent, open-access journal\",\"volume\":\"8 3\",\"pages\":\"e81-6\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-07-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/ff/c2/OpenMed-08-81.PMC4242253.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Open medicine : a peer-reviewed, independent, open-access journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2014/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open medicine : a peer-reviewed, independent, open-access journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2014/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:电梯在医院里无处不在,很活跃,可能会促进细菌的传播。本研究的目的是估计大城市教学医院电梯按钮上细菌定植的流行程度。方法:对安大略省多伦多市3家三级医院的120个电梯按钮和96个厕所表面进行取样,取样时间为工作日和周末。对于电梯,从2个内部按钮(底层的按钮和一个随机选择的上层的按钮)和2个外部按钮(底层的“上”按钮和上层的“下”按钮)取拭子。对于厕所表面,从入口门的外部和内部把手、隐私门闩和厕所冲水器上提取了棉签。使用标准的细菌收集技术获得样品,然后由不知道样品来源的技术人员进行电镀、培养和物种鉴定。结果:电梯按钮的定殖率为61%(95%可信区间为52% ~ 70%)。与按钮的位置、星期几或电梯内面板的位置有关,定植率没有明显差异。凝固酶阴性葡萄球菌是最常见的细菌,而肠球菌和假单胞菌是罕见的。电梯按钮的定殖率高于厕所表面(61%比43%,p = 0.008)。结论:医院电梯按钮常见于细菌定植,但大多数病原体与临床无关。采取简单的对策可以降低病原体传播的风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Elevator buttons as unrecognized sources of bacterial colonization in hospitals.

Background: Elevators are ubiquitous and active inside hospitals, potentially facilitating bacterial transmission. The objective of this study was to estimate the prevalence of bacterial colonization on elevator buttons in large urban teaching hospitals.

Methods: A total of 120 elevator buttons and 96 toilet surfaces were swabbed over separate intervals at 3 tertiary care hospitals on weekdays and weekends in Toronto, Ontario. For the elevators, swabs were taken from 2 interior buttons (buttons for the ground floor and one randomly selected upper-level floor) and 2 exterior buttons (the "up" button from the ground floor and the "down" button from the upper-level floor). For the toilet surfaces, swabs were taken from the exterior and interior handles of the entry door, the privacy latch, and the toilet flusher. Samples were obtained using standard bacterial collection techniques, followed by plating, culture, and species identification by a technician blind to sample source.

Results: The prevalence of colonization of elevator buttons was 61% (95% confidence interval 52%-70%). No significant differences in colonization prevalence were apparent in relation to location of the buttons, day of the week, or panel position within the elevator. Coagulase-negative staphylococci were the most common organisms cultured, whereas Enterococcus and Pseudomonas species were infrequent. Elevator buttons had a higher prevalence of colonization than toilet surfaces (61% v. 43%, p = 0.008).

Conclusions: Hospital elevator buttons were commonly colonized by bacteria, although most pathogens were not clinically relevant. The risk of pathogen transmission might be reduced by simple countermeasures.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Closing Open Medicine. Use of mental health care for nonpsychotic conditions by immigrants in different admission classes and by refugees in Ontario, Canada. Comparison of sampling methods for hard-to-reach francophone populations: yield and adequacy of advertisement and respondent-driven sampling. Pan-Canadian overpricing of medicines: a 6-country study of cost control for generic medicines. Dengue fever: a Wikipedia clinical review.
×
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