Presenter of 2 Presentations
COMPARISON OF ULTRAVIOLET C LIGHT TO ALCOHOL IN DISINFECTING CELLULAR PHONES TO PREVENT HEALTHCARE ASSOCIATED INFECTION IN AN ICU SETTING
COMPARISON OF ULTRAVIOLET C LIGHT TO ALCOHOL IN DISINFECTING CELLULAR PHONES TO PREVENT HEALTHCARE ASSOCIATED INFECTION IN AN ICU SETTING
Abstract
Background
Cellular phones of healthcare workers are carriers of pathogenic organisms, yet are rarely disinfected. These devices may become reservoirs to infect susceptible patients. Isopropyl alcohol-based disinfection of the phone has been advocated, but newer devices using ultraviolet C (UVC) light to disinfect cellular phones are now available. Level one evidence does not exist comparing the efficacy of UVC light with isopropyl alcohol-based swabs disinfection.
Aims
This study aims to compare the efficacy of the UVC light to 70% isopropyl alcohol-based swabs in disinfecting cellular phones.
Methods
A randomised controlled study in a paediatric ICU setting was conducted. Cellular phones of HCW or other personnel entering ICU were swabbed prior to and after decontaminating with either 70% isopropyl alcohol-based swabs or UVC light method. The reduction ratio of colony-forming units (CFU) pre-and post-intervention was analysed using the Mann-Whitney U test. In addition, the effectiveness of the decontaminant method was individually analysed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank paired test.
Results
A total of 74 cellular phones were sampled, 34 in the 70% isopropyl alcohol-based group, 35 in the UVC light group, with five exclusions. Disinfection with 70% isopropyl alcohol-based (z= 5,16; p < 0.000001) and UVC light (z = 3,28; p< 0.005) were individually statistically significant in reducing CFU of common skin commensals. When comparing isopropyl alcohol-based to UVC, isopropyl alcohol-based disinfection was superior to the UVC disinfection (p<0.001), effect size 0.67.
Conclusions
Disinfecting cellular phones with 70% isopropyl alcohol is superior to using UVC light.