Impact of standard test protocols on sporicidal efficacy

Wesgate, Rebecca; Rauwel, Gaétan; Criquelion, J.; Maillard, Jean‐Yves

doi:10.1016/j.jhin.2016.03.018

Cited by 13 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In most cases, C. difficile spores were more sensitive. This is in agreement with the results of the recent study which showed that spores of C. difficile were more susceptible than B. subtilis spores ( 20 ). However, previous work has found that C. difficile spores were less sensitive to all chlorine-based products tested ( 19 ).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

“…Only a few available studies have compared sporicidal activities of disinfectants, using the same test conditions such as standard tests, spore preparation methods, and bacterial strains ( 20 ). But no study comparing the efficacy of Bioxy products with that of other disinfectants has been performed to date.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Commercial sporicidal formulations have been constantly increased due to the emergence of C. difficile infection, as significant nosocomial disease. Current disinfectant products, e.g., oxidizing agents (hydrogen peroxide) and chlorine-releasing agents (sodium hypochlorite, sodium dichloroisocyanurate) ( 13 – 15 ), are continually being improved and new ones are being developed ( 16 – 20 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Evaluating the Sporicidal Activity of Disinfectants against Clostridium difficile and Bacillus amyloliquefaciens Spores by Using the Improved Methods Based on ASTM E2197-11

Uwamahoro

Massicotte²,

Hurtubise³

et al. 2018

Front. Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Spore-forming pathogenic bacteria, such as Clostridium difficile, are associated with nosocomial infection, leading to the increased use of sporicidal disinfectants, which impacts socioeconomic costs. However, C. difficile can be prevented using microorganisms such as Bacillus amyloliquefaciens, a prophylactic agent that has been proven to be effective against it in recent tests or it can be controlled by sporicidal disinfectants. These disinfectants against spores should be evaluated according to a known and recommended standard. Unfortunately, some newly manufactured disinfectants like Bioxy products have not yet been tested. ASTM E2197-11 is a standard test that uses stainless steel disks (1 cm in diameter) as carriers, and the performance of the test formulation is calculated by comparing the number of viable test organisms to that on the control carriers. Surface tests are preferable for evaluating disinfectants with sporicidal effects on hard surfaces. This study applies improved methods, based on the ASTM E2197-11 standard, for evaluating and comparing the sporicidal efficacies of several disinfectants against spores of C. difficile and B. amyloliquefaciens, which are used as the test organisms. With the improved method, all spores were recovered through vortexing and membrane filtration. The results show that chlorine-based products are effective in 5 min and Bioxy products at 5% w/v are effective in 10 min. Although Bioxy products may take longer to prove their effectiveness, their non-harmful effects to hospital surfaces and people have been well established in the literature.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluating the Sporicidal Activity of Disinfectants against Clostridium difficile and Bacillus amyloliquefaciens Spores by Using the Improved Methods Based on ASTM E2197-11

Uwamahoro

Massicotte²,

Hurtubise³

et al. 2018

Front. Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Wesgate and colleagues evaluated different standard test protocols including BS EN 14347, BS EN13704, ASTM E2197-11 and AOAC MB-15-03 on sporicidal efficacy of eight different biocidal agents. They stated that after 5 min of exposure, significant differences in sporicidal activity were found between sporicidal methods but the differences were not significant at 60 min (22). Similarly, we found that by using lower spore concentration, bacterial recoveries in three dirty conditions were relatively the same after 13 min of exposure but the severity of interfer-ing effects were intensified and distinct between 5 to 10 min of exposure.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 73%

Comparative evaluation of hydrogen peroxide sporicidal efficacy by different standard test methods

Sadeghi¹,

Abdollahi²,

Tarighi³

et al. 2020

IJM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Objectives: There are different sporicidal standard tests with various specifications to deal with products that are claimed for sporicidal activity. The aim of this study was to compare the 7% H O sporicidal efficacy against Bacillus 2 2 subtilis spores using different standard test methods. Materials and Methods: The 7% H O sporicidal efficacy against Bacillus subtilis spores was determined according to the 2 2 AOAC MB-15-04 standard of carrier test and two standard suspension tests (BS EN 13704, AFNOR NF 72-230) in both clean and dirty conditions and by using different interfering substances including bovine serum albumin, yeast extract and skimmed milk. Results: The results of suspension tests with 3 × 105 and 2 × 107 CFU/ml of B. subtilis spore concentration demonstrated that the higher spore counts lead to lower efficacy of 7% H O . Also, the sporicidal activity of 7% H O was reduced in the 2 2 2 2 presence of interfering substances. Bovine serum albumin, yeast, and skimmed milk showed similar interfering effects in suspension test with 3 × 105 CFU/ml. While, in suspension tests with higher initial spore count (2 × 107 CFU/ml) severity of interfering effects were intensified and distinct. Our results indicated that the carrier sporicidal test in comparison with suspension tests required more contact time to kill B. subtilis spores. Conclusion: The results of this study showed that it is reasonable to use interfering substances and inoculated carriers in accordance with actual conditions of product usage in a sporicidal test. Interfering substances may reduce the contact surface between H O and test spores; therefore, the sporicidal efficacy of H O was diminished. So applying suspension test in clean 2 2 2 2 condition to verify the claim of sporicidal activity is strongly discouraged

show abstract

“…Differences in inactivation results depending on the standard test used have recently been reported. 26 The 'four field test" uses a 2 kg weight on surface 17 whereas the ASTM2697-15 19 test uses 300 g. It could be argued that this difference in pressure exerted on the material will increase friction and the ability of the material to remove more bacteria from the surface, 15 in essence making the EN16615-15 standard a less stringent protocol. It is particularly interesting that the ASTM2697-15 results correlated better with the results from both surface tests EN13697-15 and the ASTM2197-11, although the protocol differs markedly in that the mechanical action in the ASTM2697-15 as well as the formulation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of test protocols and material binding on the efficacy of antimicrobial wipes

Wesgate

Robertson

Barrell

et al. 2019

Journal of Hospital Infection

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The use of effective cleaning/disinfectant product is important to control pathogens on healthcare surfaces. With the increasing number of wipe products available, there is a concern that combination of a formulation with the wrong material will decrease the product efficacy. This study aims to use a range of efficacy test protocols to determine the efficacy of four formulations before and after binding to three commonly used wiping materials. Method: Two quaternary ammonium and one hydrogen peroxide-based products, and one neutral cleaner, were combined with microfiber, cotton or non-woven materials and tested for efficacy against Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus with two surface tests (ASTM E2197-17; EN13697-15) and two "product" tests (ASTM E2967-15 and EN16615-15). Findings: Overall the impact of using different materials on formulation efficacy was limited, except for an alkyl(C12-16)dimethylbenzylammonium chloride-based product used at 0.5% v/v. The hydrogen peroxide product was the most efficacious regardless of the material used. The results from the wipe-test ASTM E2967-15 were consistent with those from the surface tests but not with the EN16615-15 which was far less stringent. Conclusions: The use of different wiping cloth materials might not impact severely on the efficacy of potent disinfectants despite the absorption of different volumes of formulation by the materials. QAC-based formulations may be more at risk when a low concentration is used. There were large differences in efficacy depending on the standard test performed, highlighting the need for more stringency in choosing the test to make a product claim on label.

show abstract

Impact of standard test protocols on sporicidal efficacy

Cited by 13 publications

References 17 publications

Evaluating the Sporicidal Activity of Disinfectants against Clostridium difficile and Bacillus amyloliquefaciens Spores by Using the Improved Methods Based on ASTM E2197-11

Evaluating the Sporicidal Activity of Disinfectants against Clostridium difficile and Bacillus amyloliquefaciens Spores by Using the Improved Methods Based on ASTM E2197-11

Comparative evaluation of hydrogen peroxide sporicidal efficacy by different standard test methods

Impact of test protocols and material binding on the efficacy of antimicrobial wipes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About