Keyboard cleanliness: A controlled study of the residual effect of chlorhexidine gluconate

Jones, Rhiannon; Hutton, Anna; Mariyaselvam, Maryanne; Hodges, Emily; Wong, Katherine; Blunt, Mark; Young, Peter

doi:10.1016/j.ajic.2014.12.002

Cited by 6 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Of these, 174 were selected for full-text review, of which 99 did not meet our criteria and were excluded, leaving a total of 75 studies in the final analysis (figure 1). 16–90…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The majority of studies (50) reported primarily on device contamination rates (mostly using cross-sectional samples) 17–23 26 29 32–36 38 41–46 49 50 52–56 60 62 64–66 68–76 81–86 90. Another 25 studies used interventional designs16 24 25 27 28 30 31 37 39 40 47 48 57–59 61 63 67 77–80 87–89; most reported contamination rates before and after a disinfection or cleaning process (and therefore also contributed data on baseline contamination rates). One study only reported contamination postintervention,61 and another two reported only on an association between device contamination and patient colonisation rates 63 88.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of these, 14 reported statistically significant reductions in contamination following the intervention (table 2). These included seven studies using wipes/pads with isopropyl alcohol, quaternary ammonium, chlorhexidine or dipotassium peroxodisulfate16 24 31 37 47 67 89; three studies using ultraviolet (UV) light39 57 77; two studies using putty cleaning compound58 59; one study with an enhanced cleaning protocol (including glove use)63 and one study using a keyboard with a cleaning alarm 87…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

What’s on your keyboard? A systematic review of the contamination of peripheral computer devices in healthcare settings

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo determine the extent and type of microbial contamination of computer peripheral devices used in healthcare settings, evaluate the effectiveness of interventions to reduce contamination of these devices and establish the risk of patient and healthcare worker infection from contaminated devices.DesignSystematic reviewMethodsWe searched four online databases: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase and Scopus for articles reporting primary data collection on contamination of computer-related equipment (including keyboards, mice, laptops and tablets) and/or studies demonstrating the effectiveness of a disinfection technique. Pooling of contamination rates was conducted where possible, and narrative synthesis was used to describe the rates of device contamination, types of bacterial and viral contamination, effectiveness of interventions and any associations between device contamination and human infections.ResultsOf the 4432 records identified, a total of 75 studies involving 2804 computer devices were included. Of these, 50 studies reported contamination of computer-related hardware, and 25 also measured the effects of a decontamination intervention. The overall proportion of contamination ranged from 24% to 100%. The most common microbial contaminants were skin commensals, but also included potential pathogens including methicillin-resistantStaphylococcus aureus,Clostridiumdifficile, vancomycin-resistantenterococci andEscherichia coli. Interventions demonstrating effective decontamination included wipes/pads using isopropyl alcohol, quaternary ammonium, chlorhexidine or dipotassium peroxodisulfate, ultraviolet light emitting devices, enhanced cleaning protocols and chlorine/bleach products. However, results were inconsistent, and there was insufficient data to demonstrate comparative effectiveness. We found little evidence on the link between device contamination and patient/healthcare worker colonisation or infection.ConclusionsComputer keyboards and peripheral devices are frequently contaminated; however, our findings do not allow us to draw firm conclusions about their relative impact on the transmission of pathogens or nosocomial infection. Additional studies measuring the incidence of healthcare-acquired infections from computer hardware, the relative risk they pose to healthcare and evidence for effective and practical cleaning methods are needed.

show abstract

“…Of these, 174 were selected for full-text review, of which 99 did not meet our criteria and were excluded, leaving a total of 75 studies in the final analysis (figure 1). 16–90…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

What’s on your keyboard? A systematic review of the contamination of peripheral computer devices in healthcare settings

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Manually applied disinfectant application methods included mopping, wiping, pouring, or spraying, using, e.g., cotton, microfiber, or pre-moistened cloths, wipes, mops. Alcohol disinfection, including some disinfectants with multiple active ingredients (e.g., chlorhexidine gluconate, QAC), was identified in 11% of studies [ 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 ]. Peroxygen disinfection, including hydrogen peroxide, peracetic acid, or peroxymonosulfate, was identified in 9% of studies [ 50 , 56 , 57 , 69 , 70 , 71 , 72 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 , 81 , 82 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Sodium hypochlorite disinfection, which comprised any disinfection method specified as bleach or sodium hypochlorite, was identified in 19% of studies [20,44,60,61,75,89,95,97,100,104,109,. Other chlorine disinfectants were identified in 14% of studies [65,70,78,101,118,[135][136][137][138][139][140][141][142][143][144][145][146][147][148][149][150][151][152][153][154]. Other chlorines included demand-release chlorines such as sodium dichloroisocyanurate, chloramine, chlorine-dioxide, and bromochloro-dimethyl-hydantoin, as well as electrolyzed water, hypochlorous acid, and any unspecified chlorine-based disinfectant.…”

Section: Disinfection Typementioning

confidence: 99%

Evidence Map and Systematic Review of Disinfection Efficacy on Environmental Surfaces in Healthcare Facilities

Christenson¹,

Cronk

Atkinson³

et al. 2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) contribute to patient morbidity and mortality with an estimated 1.7 million infections and 99,000 deaths costing USD $28–34 billion annually in the United States alone. There is little understanding as to if current environmental surface disinfection practices reduce pathogen load, and subsequently HAIs, in critical care settings. This evidence map includes a systematic review on the efficacy of disinfecting environmental surfaces in healthcare facilities. We screened 17,064 abstracts, 635 full texts, and included 181 articles for data extraction and study quality assessment. We reviewed ten disinfectant types and compared disinfectants with respect to study design, outcome organism, and fourteen indictors of study quality. We found important areas for improvement and gaps in the research related to study design, implementation, and analysis. Implementation of disinfection, a determinant of disinfection outcomes, was not measured in most studies and few studies assessed fungi or viruses. Assessing and comparing disinfection efficacy was impeded by study heterogeneity; however, we catalogued the outcomes and results for each disinfection type. We concluded that guidelines for disinfectant use are primarily based on laboratory data rather than a systematic review of in situ disinfection efficacy. It is critically important for practitioners and researchers to consider system-level efficacy and not just the efficacy of the disinfectant.

show abstract

Microbial Interactions with Accessories—A Complete Analysis

Arundhathi

Prasanth

Sivaranjani

et al. 2023

Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Keyboard cleanliness: A controlled study of the residual effect of chlorhexidine gluconate

Cited by 6 publications

References 11 publications

What’s on your keyboard? A systematic review of the contamination of peripheral computer devices in healthcare settings

What’s on your keyboard? A systematic review of the contamination of peripheral computer devices in healthcare settings

Evidence Map and Systematic Review of Disinfection Efficacy on Environmental Surfaces in Healthcare Facilities

Microbial Interactions with Accessories—A Complete Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About