Efficacy of various disinfectants against SARS coronavirus

Abstract

The recent severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) epidemic in Asia and Northern America led to broad use of various types of disinfectant in order to control the public spread of the highly contagious virus. However, only limited data were available to demonstrate their efficacy against SARS coronavirus (SARS-CoV). We therefore investigated eight disinfectants for their activity against SARS-CoV according to prEN 14476. Four hand rubs were tested at 30s (Sterillium, based on 45% iso-propanol, 30% n-propanol and 0.2% mecetronium etilsulphate; Sterillium Rub, based on 80% ethanol; Sterillium Gel, based on 85% ethanol; Sterillium Virugard, based on 95% ethanol). Three surface disinfectants were investigated at 0.5% for 30 min and 60 min (Mikrobac forte, based on benzalkonium chloride and laurylamine; Kohrsolin FF, based on benzalkonium chloride, glutaraldehyde and didecyldimonium chloride; Dismozon pur, based on magnesium monoperphthalate), and one instrument disinfectant was investigated at 4% for 15 min, 3% for 30 min and 2% for 60 min [Korsolex basic, based on glutaraldehyde and (ethylenedioxy)dimethanol]. Three types of organic load were used: 0.3% albumin, 10% fetal calf serum, and 0.3% albumin with 0.3% sheep erythrocytes. Virus titres were determined by a quantitative test (endpoint titration) in 96-well microtitre plates. With all tested preparations, SARS-CoV was inactivated to below the limit of detection (reduction factor mostly > or =4), regardless of the type of organic load. In summary, SARS-CoV can be inactivated quite easily with many commonly used disinfectants.

Human Coronaviruses: Insights into Environmental Resistance and Its Influence on the Development of New Antiseptic Strategies

“…Contact times were then, still in accordance to the European Standard, 30 and 60 min. SARS-CoV was inactivated by all the disinfectants to below the limit of detection (the smaller reduction factor was 3.25 log 10 ), regardless of the type of organic load [132]. The same team pursued its investigation evaluating the SARS-CoV virucidal activity of different disinfectants based on alcohols (propanol, ethanol used for hands disinfection), aldehydes (formaldehyde, glutardialdehyde), glucoprotamin and wine vinegar.…”

Inactivation of Human Norovirus Surrogates by Benzalkonium Chloride, Potassium Peroxymonosulfate, Tannic Acid, and Gallic Acid

“…Their antibacterial activity has been reported against Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Streptococcus agalactiae, Staphylococcus aureus, and Escherichia coli among others (Mosca et al, 2006;Richards and Mizrahi, 1978;Thomas et al, 2005). Their antiviral activities have been shown against adenovirus (Lazzaro et al, 2009), acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (Rabenau et al, 2005), herpes simplex virus (Thompson, 1998), and influenza virus (Armstrong and Froelich, 1964). Interestingly, the effect of BAC against human noroviruses (or its surrogates) has not been well documented in literature.…”

Efficacy of alcohol-based hand sanitizer on hands soiled with dirt and cooking oil

“…Existing laboratory studies have found that the presence of proteins (e.g. fetal calf serum) on hands does not significantly affect the efficacy of ABHS against bacteria and viruses (Kampf et al 2002;Sickbert-Bennett et al 2004;Rabenau et al 2005). ABHS has also been found to be better at disinfecting hands than handwashing with soap and water when blood is present (Larson & Bobo 1992), but there are no loiown studies investigating the shielding effect of materials more commonly found on the hands of non-health care workers, such as food, dirt, and oil.…”