These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Floor cleaning: effect on bacteria and organic materials in hospital rooms.
    Author: Andersen BM, Rasch M, Kvist J, Tollefsen T, Lukkassen R, Sandvik L, Welo A.
    Journal: J Hosp Infect; 2009 Jan; 71(1):57-65. PubMed ID: 19013671.
    Abstract:
    Routine surface cleaning is recommended to control the spread of pathogens in hospital environments. In Norway, ordinary cleaning of patient rooms is traditionally performed with soap and water. In this study, four floor-mopping methods--dry, spray, moist and wet mopping--were compared by two systems using adenosine triphosphate (ATP) bioluminescence (Hygiena and Biotrace). These systems assess residual organic soil on surfaces. The floor-mopping methods were also assessed by microbiological samples from the floor and air, before and after cleaning. All methods reduced organic material on the floors but wet and moist mopping seemed to be the most effective (P < 0.001, P < 0.011, respectively, ATP Hygiena). The two ATP methods were easy to use, although each had their own reading scales. Cleaning reduced organic material to 5-36% of the level present before cleaning, depending upon mopping method. All four mopping methods reduced bacteria on the floor from about 60-100 to 30-60 colony-forming units (cfu)/20cm2 floor. Wet, moist and dry mopping seemed to be more effective in reducing bacteria on the floor, than the spray mopping (P=0.007, P=0.002 and P=0.011, respectively). The burden of bacteria in air increased for all methods just after mopping. The overall best cleaning methods seemed to be moist and wet mopping.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]