Effectiveness of a shielded ultraviolet C air disinfection system in an inpatient pharmacy of a tertiary care children's hospital

Guimera, Don; Trzil, Jean; Joyner, Joy; Hysmith, Nicholas D.

doi:10.1016/j.ajic.2017.07.026

Cited by 15 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although there are no comparable field studies in commercial buildings, a recent hospital study using a similar UV device showed a 27% reduction in airborne bacterial contamination with a range of -5 to +44% (Hakim et al 2019). Another study using a similar in-room UVGI device showed a 62% reduction in bacterial contamination (Guimera et al 2018). A hospital study employing a similar UV device showed a reduction of 42% in airborne bacteria and healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) at this facility decreased significantly (Ethington et al 2018).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 68%

Evaluation of multiple fixed in-room air cleaners with ultraviolet germicidal irradiation, in high-occupancy areas of selected commercial indoor environments

Lee

Delclòs

Berkheiser

et al. 2021

Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of ultraviolet germicidal irradiation (UVGI) to combat disease transmission has come into the international spotlight again because of the recent SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and ongoing outbreaks of MDROs (multidrug resistant organisms) in hospitals. Although the implementation of ultraviolet disinfection technology is widely employed in healthcare facilities and its effectiveness has been repeatedly demonstrated, the use of such technology in the commercial sector has been limited. Considering that most disease transmission occurs in commercial, public, and residential indoor environments as opposed to healthcare facilities, there is a need to understand whether ultraviolet (UV) disinfection technology can be effective for mitigating disease transmission in these environments. The results presented here demonstrate that the installation of fixed in-room UVGI air cleaners in commercial buildings, including restaurants and offices, can produce significant reductions in both airborne and surface borne bacterial contamination. Total airborne reductions after UV implementation at six separate commercial sites averaged 73% (p<0.0001) with a range of 71-88%. Total non-high touch surface reductions after implementation averaged 55% (p<0.0001) with a range of 28-88%. All reductions at the mitigated sites were statistically significant. The mean value of indoor airborne bacteria was 320 CFU/m 3 before intervention and 76 CFU/m 3 after. The mean value of indoor non-high touch surface borne bacteria was 131 CFU/plate before intervention and 47 CFU/plate after. All test locations and controls had their required pandemic cleaning procedures in place for pre-and post-sampling events. Outdoor levels of airborne bacteria were monitored and there was no significant correlation between the levels of airborne bacteria in the outside air as opposed to the indoor air. Rooms with fixed in-room UVGI air cleaners installed had significant CFU reductions on local surface contamination, which is a novel and important finding. Installation of fixed in-room UVGI air cleaners in commercial buildings will decontaminate the indoor environment and reduce hazardous exposure to human pathogens.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 68%

Evaluation of multiple fixed in-room air cleaners with ultraviolet germicidal irradiation, in high-occupancy areas of selected commercial indoor environments

Lee

Delclòs

Berkheiser

et al. 2021

Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Disadvantages: relatively high maintenance cost (lamp replacement); few reports on virus removal efficiency; low efficiency for removing spores. Examples: (a) fungi and bacteria with 2–110 CFU m −3 in rooms, removal of 78% fungi and 62% bacteria (continuous flow UV sterilizer + filter, air flowrate, 0.11 m 3 s−1 , 0.11 units m −2 ) (Guimera et al 2018 ). (b) Removal of 90% Serratia (bacillus) and 99.99% Aspergillus (fungus) (continuous flow UV sterilizer + filter, air flowrate 4.5 m 3 s −1 , 72 W lamps, 0.5 s exposure time, 413 m s −1 air speed, 3744 h lamp life (Kowalski and Bahnfleth 2000 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Simulation of thermal sanitization of air with heat recovery as applied to airborne pathogen deactivation

Busto

Tarifa

Cristaldi

et al. 2022

Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The technique of air sterilization by thermal effect was revisited in this work. The impact of incorporating a high efficiency heat recovery exchanger to a sterilizing cell was especially assessed. A mathematical model was developed to study the dynamics and the steady state of the sterilizer. Computer simulation and reported data of thermal inactivation of pathogens permitted obtaining results for a proof-of-concept. The simulation results confirmed that the incorporation of a heat recovery exchanger permits saving more than 90% of the energy needed to heat the air to the temperature necessary for sterilization, i.e., sterilization without heat recovery consumes 10–20 times the energy of the same sterilization device with heat recovery. Sanitization temperature is the main process variable for sanitization, a fact related to the activated nature of the thermal inactivation of viruses and bacteria. Heat recovery efficiency was a strong function of the heat transfer parameters but also rather insensitive to the cell temperature. The heat transfer area determined the maximum capacity of the sterilizer (maximum air flowrate) given the restrictions of minimum sanitization efficiency and maximum power consumption. The proposed thermal sterilization device has important advantages of robustness and simplicity over other commercial sterilization devices, needing practically no maintenance and eliminating a big variety of microorganisms to any desired degree. For most pathogens, the inactivation can be total. This result is not affected by the uncertainties in thermal inactivation data, due to the Arrhenius-like dependence of inactivation. Temperature can be adjusted to achieve any removal degree.

show abstract

“…These results corroborate earlier studies on the same or similar GUV air disinfection devices in which airborne bacteria levels were significantly reduced. 17,[21][22][23][24] Previous studies have demonstrated that GUV can be effective at reducing airborne concentrations for a wide variety of pathogens, including M. tuberculosis, Staphylococcus aureus, S. albus, E. coli, Streptococcus pneumoniae, Serratia marcescens, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, P. fluorescens, Proteus vulgaris, Moraxella catarrhalis, influenza A, SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus, and various other pathogens that cause upper-respiratory infections. [8][9][10]12,13,[23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33] The result that air disinfection is significantly associated with the reduction of surface contamination is an important finding and corroborates previous studies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reduction of airborne and surface-borne bacteria in a medical center burn intensive care unit using active, upper-room, germicidal ultraviolet (GUV) disinfection

Lee,

Lie,

Bauer

et al. 2023

Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To determine the effectiveness of active, upper-room, germicidal ultraviolet (GUV) devices in reducing bacterial contamination in patient rooms in air and on surfaces as a supplement to the central heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) air handling unit (AHU) with MERV 14 filters and UV-C disinfection. Methods: This study was conducted in an academic medical center, burn intensive care unit (BICU), for 4 months in 2022. Room occupancy was monitored and recorded. In total, 402 preinstallation and postinstallation bacterial air and non–high-touch surface samples were obtained from 10 BICU patient rooms. Airborne particle counts were measured in the rooms, and bacterial air samples were obtained from the patient-room supply air vents and outdoor air, before and after the intervention. After preintervention samples were obtained, an active, upper-room, GUV air disinfection system was deployed in each of the patient rooms in the BICU. Results: The average levels of airborne bacteria of 395 CFU/m3 before GUV device installation and 37 CFU/m3 after installation indicated an 89% overall decrease (P < .0001). Levels of surface-borne bacteria were associated with a 69% decrease (P < .0001) after GUV device installation. Outdoor levels of airborne bacteria averaged 341 CFU/m3 in March before installation and 676 CFU/m3 in June after installation, but this increase was not significant (P = .517). Conclusions: Significant reductions in air and surface contamination occurred in all rooms and areas and were not associated with variations in outdoor air concentrations of bacteria. The significant decrease of surface bacteria is an unexpected benefit associated with in-room GUV air disinfection, which can potentially reduce overall bioburden.

show abstract

Effectiveness of a shielded ultraviolet C air disinfection system in an inpatient pharmacy of a tertiary care children's hospital

Cited by 15 publications

References 4 publications

Evaluation of multiple fixed in-room air cleaners with ultraviolet germicidal irradiation, in high-occupancy areas of selected commercial indoor environments

Evaluation of multiple fixed in-room air cleaners with ultraviolet germicidal irradiation, in high-occupancy areas of selected commercial indoor environments

Simulation of thermal sanitization of air with heat recovery as applied to airborne pathogen deactivation

Reduction of airborne and surface-borne bacteria in a medical center burn intensive care unit using active, upper-room, germicidal ultraviolet (GUV) disinfection

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About