Detection of viruses and body fluids which may contain viruses in the domestic environment

Abstract

The domestic environment was investigated for the presence of viruses and body fluids that may contain viruses. A range of surfaces in 39 homes (17 visited on 2 occasions) were sampled by swabbing and analysed using cell culture, reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction for enteroviral RNA, haemoglobin as a marker for blood, amylase as an indicator of urine, saliva and sweat, and protein as an indicator of general hygiene. Haemoglobin was found on 1.9% of surfaces sampled and of the positive samples 30% were from articles frequently handled. Amylase (> 5 U/l) was found in 29.3% of samples tested. Protein was found in 97.8% of samples tested. Enteroviral RNA, indicating the presence of virus, was detected in 3 out of 448 samples tested; they were from a tap handle, telephone handpiece and a toilet bowl. No viruses were isolated in cell culture, however significant problems were encountered with bacterial and fungal contamination. This work demonstrates that only testing environmental samples for bacteria and ATP may not give a total view of the microbiological problem in the home. A range of test methods is useful to gain a broad view of the problems of hygiene in the home and to allow comparative studies of specific areas such as the kitchen and bathroom.

Spread and prevention of some common viral infections in community facilities and domestic homes

“…This highlights that surfaces may remain soiled for some time and may not be thoroughly cleaned. Bellamy et al. (1998) also detected enteroviral RNA in three of 448 environmental samples (tap handle, telephone handpiece and toilet bowl).…”

“…Bellamy et al. (1998) investigated the domestic environment for the presence of viruses and body fluids that may contain viruses.…”

Microbiology of public telephones

“…1,2 The presence of virus on telephone handpiece was also reported. 3 These results indicated that the telephones and pagers are contaminated with pathogenic organisms, and people are exposed to these bacteria and airborne transmittable diseases during normal use. However, these studies were performed inside the buildings and probably did not include the environmental effects, such as, the seasonal changes in temperature and the variations in human activity.…”

Transfer Efficiency of Bacteria and Viruses from Porous and Nonporous Fomites to Fingers under Different Relative Humidity Conditions

“…A number of studies have shown that enteric and respiratory pathogens are capable of surviving from hours to months on fomites, depending on the numbers deposited, the type of microorganism, and the variable environmental conditions (10)(11)(12). Several studies have shown that inanimate surfaces found in day care centers (8,(13)(14)(15)(16)(17), schools (18), office buildings (19), homes (20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27), public areas (28), or hospitals (12,(29)(30)(31)(32)(33) can be reservoirs for secondary modes of transmission, with contaminated hands playing a critical role as a route of exposure.…”