Disinfecting handheld electronic devices with UV-C in a healthcare setting

Cremers-Pijpers, Suzan; Rossum, Carsten van; Dautzenberg, Mirjam J. D.; Wertheim, Heiman; Tostmann, Alma; Hopman, Joost

doi:10.1016/j.infpip.2021.100133

Cited by 11 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A previous study identified a potential risk with mobile devices and recommended that the routine disinfection of these devices should be incorporated into infection control standards which can significantly reduce the incidence of nosocomial infections presently reported in medical facilities. 13,[29][30][31] Thirdly, the use of those devices during the COVID-19 pandemic was even more challenging. There was an exponential increase in the use of electronic devices during the COVID-19 pandemic due to its accessibility of patient information for staff in isolation facilities, allowing them to participate in virtual ward rounds and support front-line staff with clinical advice and administrative support and their use in telehealth services.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Pros and Cons of Use of Handheld Electronic Devices During Ward Rounds and the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic

Suliman¹,

Akbar²,

Yousaf³

et al. 2023

AMEP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The exponential use of handheld electronic devices (HEDs) among healthcare providers has shown the potential to enhance clinical workflows and improve patient care. However, the challenges and risks of carrying these devices during ward rounds and their impact on postgraduate trainees’ (PGTs’) training in general and more specifically during the COVID-19 pandemic need to be explored. Methods A cross-sectional mixed-methods online survey was conducted to evaluate the perceptions of trainees and faculty at Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education International accredited residency and fellowships programs in Qatar on the use of HEDs on clinical workflow, trainees’ education, and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. One hundred and fifty-eight participants were enrolled in the study (87 postgraduate trainees and 71 faculty). Exploratory data analysis and descriptive statistics were performed using STATA version 12 and thematic analysis of 301 qualitative responses to the survey open-ended questions using Atlas. ti qualitative software, version 9.4.0. Results Almost all PGTs, 83 (95.4%), and faculty 43 (62.3%) use HEDs during ward rounds. Accessibility of patient information by PGTs 73 (94.8%) and faculty 46 (84.4%) and work efficiency were the main perceived benefits. Hindering communication between team members, disruption of interaction with patients, increased risk of infection and breach of patient confidentiality were among the challenges associated with their use. Carrying devices reduced the frequency of hand hygiene practices and physical examinations of patients by trainees. The COVID-19 pandemic led to a decrease in the use of HEDs by both faculty [38(64%)] and PGTs [42(60%)]. Conclusion HEDs’ use is valued by both faculty and PGTs in enhancing workflow, trainees’ education, patient experience, and patient care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Graduate medical education leaders should adopt measures to monitor their use during ward rounds as they can negatively impact trainees’ education, reduce interaction with patients, increase the risk of infection, and breach patient confidentiality.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In comparison, 44 (62%) of the faculty were men, and 27 (38%) were women. Trainees were younger, with a median age of 28 (26)(27)(28)(29)(30)(31)(32)(33)(34) and 47 (39-55) for faculty. Out of the PGTs, 67 (77.9%) of the respondents were residents, and 19 (22.1%) were clinical fellows.…”

Section: Characteristics Of Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Pros and Cons of Use of Handheld Electronic Devices During Ward Rounds and the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic

Suliman¹,

Akbar²,

Yousaf³

et al. 2023

AMEP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These results indicate that using the sanitizer once or twice a day can result in consistently decreased contamination of smartphones. 1 Davis spoke to the importance of considering human factors and workflows when selecting which disinfection modality for mobile devices might be best. "With UV sanitizers, for example, you put your mobile device in it usually for 30 seconds to two minutes, which can be an eternity for a nurse," he said.…”

Section: Ultraviolet Lightmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disinfecting mobile devices in health care settings

Croke¹

2021

AORN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Due to the necessary direct contact of human fingers with the touchscreen, the release and ingestion of microorganisms (including pathogens) is virtually unavoidable. Therefore, it is not surprising that various studies find microbial contamination on up to 100% of touchscreens and that there is concern that such screens are potential vectors of infection [ 1 ], [ 2 ], [ 3 ], [ 4 ], [ 5 ], [ 6 ], [ 7 ], [ 8 ]. Consequently, touchscreen disinfection is recommended or even demanded [ 4 ], [ 9 ], [ 10 ], [ 11 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…UVC exhibits the strongest antimicrobial effect by damaging the DNA and RNA of all microorganisms without exception. Disinfection by ultraviolet radiation is a process that can be performed in minutes or even seconds given sufficient irradiance [ 8 ], [ 14 ], [ 15 ], [ 16 ], [ 17 ], [ 18 ], [ 19 ], [ 20 ], [ 27 ], [ 28 ]. Conceivable applications are those in which this could happen automatically even between two users, e.g., by irradiating the touchscreen from above or from the side, or scanning it as described by Alhmidi et al [ 27 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of microbial touchscreen contamination for the determination of reasonable ultraviolet disinfection doses

Heßling

Haag

Sicks

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Touchscreens are usually microbially contaminated and can therefore act as fomites inside and outside healthcare environments. Due to the increasing use of such touchscreens and the growing awareness of infection risks, approaches that allow safe and automatic disinfection are desired. Ultraviolet (UV) irradiation, with its known antimicrobial efficacy, could achieve this goal, but should be executed with limited touchscreen degradation, disinfection duration, and energy consumption. It should also pose as little harm as possible to humans even in case of failure. Materials and methods: A literature search was performed first to identify the microorganisms most commonly found on touchscreens. Then, the 90% reduction doses (D90 doses) for the different relevant microorganisms and UV spectral ranges were determined from the literature, and irradiation doses are suggested that should reduce most of these important microorganisms by 5 log-levels. Results: The most frequent microorganisms are staphylococci, bacilli, micrococci, enterococci, pseudomonads and E. coli with small differences between hospital and community environments, if antibiotic resistance properties are ignored. The determined irradiation doses for a 5 log-reduction of the most frequent microorganisms are about 40 mJ/cm 2 , 80 J/cm 2 , 500 J/cm 2 and 50 mJ/cm 2 for the UV spectral ranges UVC, UVB, UVA and far-UVC, respectively. These doses are also sufficient to inactivate all nosocomial ESKAPE pathogens on touchscreens by at least 99.999%. Conclusion: Disinfection is achievable in all UV spectral ranges, with UVC being the most effective, enabling automatic disinfection within a minute or less. The much higher doses required in the UVB and UVA spectral range result in much longer disinfection durations, with the advantage of a reduced risk to humans. For all kinds of UV irradiation, the doses should be limited to reasonable values to avoid irradiating an already more or less sterile surface and to prevent degradation of touchscreen devices.

show abstract

Disinfecting handheld electronic devices with UV-C in a healthcare setting

Cited by 11 publications

References 16 publications

The Pros and Cons of Use of Handheld Electronic Devices During Ward Rounds and the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic

The Pros and Cons of Use of Handheld Electronic Devices During Ward Rounds and the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic

Disinfecting mobile devices in health care settings

Review of microbial touchscreen contamination for the determination of reasonable ultraviolet disinfection doses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About