According to an article on the Infection Control Today website, because of a scarcity of data int this area, recent study sought to compare the accuracy of visual inspection with other non-microbiologic methods of assessing the effectiveness of post-discharge cleaning (PDC).
In their 2013 study, Snyder GM, Holyoak AD, Leary KE, Sullivan BF, Davis RB and Wright SB examined the topic in an study published Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control.
The researchers used prospective evaluation to determine the effectiveness of PDC in comparison to a microbiologic comparator. Using a highly standardized methodology examining 15 high-touch surfaces, the effectiveness of PDC was evaluated by four methods:
• Visual inspection
• The removal of fluorescent marker (FM) placed prior to room occupancy
• The quantification of adenosine triphosphate (ATP) levels
• Culture for aerobic colony counts (ACC), the article said.
Twenty rooms including 293 surfaces were sampled in the study, including 290 surfaces sampled by all four methods. ACC demonstrated 72 percent of surfaces to be microbiologically clean. Visual inspection, FM, ATP demonstrated 57 percent, 49 percent, and 66 percent of surfaces to be clean. Using ACC as a microbiologic comparator, the sensitivity of visual inspection, FM, and ATP to detect a clean surface were 60 percent, 51 percent, and 70 percent, respectively; the specificity of visual inspection, FM, and ATP were 52 percent, 56 percent, and 44 percent, according to the study.
Read the article.
Read the study.
Disinfectant Dispensers in Healthcare Facilities Often Fail to Deliver Safe Concentrations: Study
Duke University Health System Receives $50 Million for Proton Beam Therapy Center
UT Southwestern Experiences Data Breach Through Calendar Tool
Protecting Patient Data: Strategies and Tactics
Duke Health to Acquire Lake Norman Regional Medical Center