Search

[english] Background: The Rudolf Schuelke Foundation addresses topics related to hygiene, infection prevention and public health. In this context a panel of scientists from various European countries discussed “The Role of Surface Disinfection in Infection Prevention”. The most important findings and conclusions of this meeting are summarised in the present consensus paper.Aim: Although the relevance of surface disinfection is increasingly being accepted, there are still a number of issues which remain controversial. In particular, the following topics were addressed: Transferral of microbes from surface to patients as a cause of infection, requirements for surface disinfectants, biocidal resistance and toxicity, future challenges.Methods and findings: After discussion and review of current scientific literature the authors agreed that contaminated surfaces contribute to the transmission of pathogens and may thus pose an infection hazard. Targeted surface disinfection based on a risk profile is seen as an indispensable constituent in a multibarrier approach of universal infection control precautions. Resistance and cross-resistance depend on the disinfectant agent as well as on the microbial species. Prudent implementation of surface disinfection regimens tested to be effective can prevent or minimize adverse effects.Conclusions: Disinfection must be viewed as a holistic process. There is a need for defining standard principles for cleaning and disinfection, for ensuring compliance with these principles by measures such as written standard operating procedures, adequate training and suitable audit systems. Also, test procedures must be set up in order to demonstrate the efficacy of disinfectants including new application methods such as pre-soaked wipes for surface disinfection.

In the 1940s and 1950s, researchers seeking safe and novel ways to eliminate airborne pathogens from enclosed spaces, investigated glycol vapours as a method of disinfection. More recently, the COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the need for a non-toxic aerial disinfectant that can be used in the presence of people. This scoping review is intended to analyse the early and more recent literature on glycol disinfection, scrutinizing the methodologies used, and to determine if the use of glycols as modern-day disinfectants is justified PRISMA-ScR guidelines were used to assess the 749 articles retrieved from the Web of Science platform, with 46 articles retained after the search strategy was applied. Early studies generally demonstrated good disinfection capabilities against airborne bacteria and viruses, particularly with propylene glycol (PG) vapour. Vapour pressure, relative humidity, and glycol concentration were found to be important factors affecting the efficacy of glycol vapours. Contact times depended mainly on the glycol application method (i.e. aerosolization or liquid formulation), although information on how glycol efficacy is impacted by contact time is limited. Triethylene glycol (TEG) is deemed to have low toxicity, carcinogenicity, and mutagenicity and is registered for use in air sanitization and deodorization by the US Environmental Protection Agency. Glycols are also used in liquid formulations for their antimicrobial activity against a wide range of microorganisms, although when used as a non-active excipient in products, their contribution to antimicrobial efficacy is rarely assessed. The appropriate use of liquid glycol-containing formulations was found to positively impact the antimicrobial capabilities of disinfectants when used at temperatures <0, food preservatives, and dental medicaments. Providing modern delivery technology can accurately control environmental conditions, the use of aerosolized glycol formulations should lead to successful disinfection, aiding infection prevention, and control regimens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]