2022-01-22Zeitschriftenartikel
Efficacy of five ‘sporicidal’ surface disinfectants against Clostridioides difficile spores in suspension tests and 4-field tests
dc.contributor.author | Gemein, S. | |
dc.contributor.author | Andrich, R. | |
dc.contributor.author | Christiansen, B. | |
dc.contributor.author | Decius, M. | |
dc.contributor.author | Exner, M. | |
dc.contributor.author | Hunsinger, B. | |
dc.contributor.author | Imenova, E. | |
dc.contributor.author | Kampf, G. | |
dc.contributor.author | Koburger-Janssen, T. | |
dc.contributor.author | Konrat, K. | |
dc.contributor.author | Martiny, H. | |
dc.contributor.author | Meckel, M. | |
dc.contributor.author | Mutters, N.T. | |
dc.contributor.author | Pitten, F-A. | |
dc.contributor.author | Schulz, S. | |
dc.contributor.author | Schwebke, I. | |
dc.contributor.author | Gebel, J. | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2022-04-13T06:36:05Z | |
dc.date.available | 2022-04-13T06:36:05Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2022-01-22 | none |
dc.identifier.other | 10.1016/j.jhin.2022.01.010 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://edoc.rki.de/176904/9618 | |
dc.description.abstract | Background: A sporicidal surface disinfection is recommended both for the outbreak and the endemic setting but a comparative evaluation on the efficacy of ‘sporicidal’ surface disinfectants using suspension tests and 4-field tests has not been performed. Aim: To determine the efficacy of five ‘sporicidal’ surface disinfectants (three ready-to-use wipes (A, B, E), two concentrates (C, D) based on peroxides or aldehydes against C. difficile spores. Methods: The efficacy was determined under clean conditions using a suspension test and the 4-field test. Each test was performed in duplicate in two separate laboratories. Wipes were wrung to collect the solution for the suspension tests. Results: Product A (peracetic acid; 5 min), product C (peracetic acid; 2% solution in 15 min or 1% solution in 30 min) and product D (peracetic acid; only 2% solution in 15 min) were effective with at least a 4 log10-reduction of C. difficile spores in suspension and on surfaces. Product B (hydrogen peroxide) was not effective in suspension (0.9 log10 after 15 min; 3.2 log10 after 1 h) and on surfaces (2.8 log10 after 15 and 60 min). Product E based on glutaraldehyde, (ethylendioxy)dimethanol and DDAC demonstrated 0.9 log10 after 4 h in suspension and 4.5 log10 after 4 h on surfaces. Conclusions: Not all surface disinfectants with a sporicidal claim were effective against C. difficile spores in standardized suspension tests and in the 4-field test. In clinical practice preference should be given to products that reliably pass the efficacy criteria of both types of tests. | eng |
dc.language.iso | eng | none |
dc.publisher | Robert Koch-Institut | |
dc.rights | (CC BY 3.0 DE) Namensnennung 3.0 Deutschland | ger |
dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/de/ | |
dc.subject | C. difficile | eng |
dc.subject | Sporicidal activity | eng |
dc.subject | Suspension test | eng |
dc.subject | 4-field test | eng |
dc.subject | Peracetic acid | eng |
dc.subject | Glutaraldehyde | eng |
dc.subject.ddc | 610 Medizin und Gesundheit | none |
dc.title | Efficacy of five ‘sporicidal’ surface disinfectants against Clostridioides difficile spores in suspension tests and 4-field tests | none |
dc.type | article | |
dc.identifier.urn | urn:nbn:de:0257-176904/9618-3 | |
dc.type.version | publishedVersion | none |
local.edoc.container-title | Journal of Hospital Infection | none |
local.edoc.container-issn | 1532-2939 | none |
local.edoc.type-name | Zeitschriftenartikel | |
local.edoc.container-type | periodical | |
local.edoc.container-type-name | Zeitschrift | |
local.edoc.container-url | https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195670122000251?via%3Dihub | none |
local.edoc.container-publisher-name | Elsevier | none |
local.edoc.container-volume | 122 | none |
local.edoc.container-year | 2022 | none |
local.edoc.container-firstpage | 140 | none |
local.edoc.container-lastpage | 147 | none |
dc.description.version | Peer Reviewed | none |