Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-nwzlb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-29T13:46:12.097Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Type, Level, and Distribution of Microorganisms within the Ward Environment: A Zonal Analysis of an Intensive Care Unit and a Gastrointestinal Surgical Ward

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Ginny Moore*
Affiliation:
Clinical Microbiology and Virology, University College London Hospitals National Health Service Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
Monika Muzslay
Affiliation:
Clinical Microbiology and Virology, University College London Hospitals National Health Service Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
A. Peter R. Wilson
Affiliation:
Clinical Microbiology and Virology, University College London Hospitals National Health Service Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
*
Clinical Microbiology and Virology, University College London Hospitals National Health Service Foundation Trust, 60 Whitfield Street, London WIT 4EU, United Kingdom (peter.wilson@udh.nhs.uk).

Abstract

Objective.

To investigate the distribution of hospital pathogens within general and critical care ward environments and to determine the most significant bacterial reservoirs within each ward type.

Design.

Prospective 4-month microbiological survey.

Setting.

The intensive care unit (ICU) and gastrointestinal (GI) surgical ward of a London teaching hospital.

Patients.

Sampling was conducted in and around the bed space of 166 different patients (99 in the ICU and 67 in the GI ward).

Methods.

Conventional agar contact methodology was used to sample 123 predetermined sites twice a week for 17 weeks. Sixty-one surfaces were located within the ICU, and 62 were located within the GI ward. Each surface was located within a theoretical zone of increasing distance from the patient. Aerobic colony counts were determined, and confirmatory testing was conducted on all presumptive pathogens.

Results.

Regardless of ward type, surfaces located closest to the patient, specifically those associated with the bed (side rails, bed control, and call button), were the most heavily contaminated. Elsewhere, the type of surfaces contaminated differed with ward type. In the ICU, bacteria were most likely to be on surfaces that were regularly touched by healthcare workers (eg, telephones and computer keyboards). In the GI ward, where the patients were mobile, the highest numbers of bacteria (including potential nosocomial pathogens) were on surfaces that were mainly touched by patients, particularly their toilet and shower facilities.

Conclusions.

In terms of cleaning, a hospital should not be considered a single entity. Different ward types should be treated as separate environments, and cleaning protocols should be adjusted accordingly.

Type
Original Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Whitehead, H, May, D, Agahi, H. An exploratory study into the factors that influence patients' perceptions in an acute NHS trust hospital. J Facil Manage 2007;5:275289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Griffith, CJ, Cooper, RA, Gilmore, J, Davies, C, Lewis, M. An evaluation of hospital cleaning regimes and standards. J Hosp Infect 2000;45:1928.Google Scholar
3.Cooper, RA, Griffith, CJ, Malik, RE, Obee, P, Looker, N. Monitoring the effectiveness of cleaning in four British hospitals. Am J Infect Control 2007;35:338341.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Boyce, JM, Havill, NL, Dumigan, DG, Golebiewski, M, Balogun, O, Rizvani, R. Monitoring the effectiveness of hospital cleaning practices by use of an adenosine triphosphate bioluminescence assay. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2009;30:678684.Google Scholar
5.Bellamy, E. An audit of cleaning effectiveness using adenosine triphosphate (ATP) bioluminescence assay following outbreaks of infection. J Infect Prevent 2012;13:154157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Carling, PC, Parry, MF, Bruno-Mutha, LA, Dick, B. Improving environmental hygiene in 27 intensive care units to decrease multidrug-resistant bacterial transmission. Crit Care Med 2010;38:10541059.Google Scholar
7.May, D, Pitt, M. Environmental cleaning in UK healthcare since the NHS Plan: a policy and evidence based context. Facilities 2012;30:622.Google Scholar
8.Winkler, A, Freund, M. The potential for third party standards at manufacturing and retail to reduce the risk of listeriosis arising from consumption of Listeria monocytogenes from ready-to-eat foods. Food Control 2011;22:15031505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Moore, G, Griffith, C, Fielding, L. A comparison of traditional and recently developed methods for monitoring surface hygiene within the food industry: a laboratory study. Dairy Food Environ Sank 2001;6:478488.Google Scholar
10.Obee, P, Griffith, CJ, Cooper, RA, Bennion, NE. An evaluation of different methods for the recovery of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus from environmental surfaces. J Hosp Infect 2007; 65:3541.Google Scholar
11.Dancer, SJ. How do we assess hospital cleaning? a proposal for microbiological standards for surface hygiene in hospitals. J Hosp Infect 2004;56:1015.Google Scholar
12.Creamer, E, Humphreys, H. The contribution of beds to healthcare-associated infection: the importance of adequate decontamination. J Hosp Infect 2008;69:823.Google Scholar
13.Attaway, HH, Fairey, S, Steed, LL, Saigado, CD, Michels, HT, Schmidt, MG. Intrinsic bacterial burden associated with intensive care unit hospital beds: effects of disinfection on population recovery and mitigation of potential infection risk. Am J Infect Control 2012;40:907912.Google Scholar
14.Huang, SS, Datta, R, Platt, R. Risk of acquiring antibiotic-resistant bacteria from prior room occupants. Arch Intern Med 2006;166:19451951.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15.Ali, S, Moore, G, Wilson, APR. Effect of surface coating and finish upon the cleanability of bed rails and the spread of Staphylococcus aureus. J Hosp Infect 2012;80:192198.Google Scholar
16.Wilson, APR, Smyth, D, Moore, G, et al.The impact of enhanced cleaning within the ICU on contamination of the near-patient environment with hospital pathogens: a randomized crossover study in critical care units in two hospitals. Crit Care Med 2011;39:651658.Google Scholar
17.Duckro, AN, Blom, DW, Lyle, EA, Weinstein, RA, Hayden, MK. Transfer of vancomycin-resistant enterococci via healthcare worker hands. Arch Intern Med 2005;165:302307.Google Scholar
18.Muzslay, M, Moore, G, Turton, JF, Wilson, APR. Dissemination of antibiotic-resistant enterococci within the ward environment: the role of airborne bacteria and the risk posed by unrecognized carriers. Am J infect Control 2013;41:5760.Google Scholar
19.Landers, T, Abusalem, S, Coty, M-B, Bingham, J. Patient-centered hand hygiene: the next step in infection prevention. Am J Infect Control 2012;40(suppl 1):S11S17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20.Merry, AF, Miller, TE, Findon, G, Webster, CS, Neff, SPW. Touch contamination levels during anaesthetic procedures and their relationship to hand hygiene procedures: a clinical audit. Br J Anaesth 2001;87:291294.Google Scholar
21.Patrick, DR, Findon, G, Miller, TE. Residual moisture determines the level of touch-contact associated bacterial transfer following hand washing. Epidemiol Infect 1997;119:319325.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed