Improved terminal disinfection using hydrogen peroxide vapour (HPV) or bleach to control C. diff

A prospective before-after study at the 900 bed St. John’s Mercy Medical Center evaluated the impact of an HPV intervention focused on the terminal disinfection of rooms used by patients with multidrug-resistant organisms and C. difficile. HPV was introduced on a priority scale accounting for the target pathogen and the risk associated with the unit. Due to local prevalence, most of the rooms decontaminated using HPV were vacated by patients with C. difficile infection (CDI). Hence, the authors evaluated the impact of introducing HPV on the rates of CDI.
The rate of CDI was static prior to the introduction of HPV, with no significant change in rate from 2007 to 2008 (Figure). Hence, this study was performed in a truly endemic setting in contrast to a previous study of a similar design by Boyce et al., which was performed in a “hyper-endemic” setting. When HPV was introduced in 2009 (along with enhanced conventional methods comprising quadruple bleach disinfection for rooms that could not be disinfected using HPV), the rate of CDI fell by 37% from 0.9 to 0.5 cases per 1000 patient days (p<0.0001) (see chart below).
Chart showing the rate of C. difficile infection before and after the implementation of HPV or quadruple bleach disinfection for the terminal decontamination of patient rooms.
Micro Blog Jan 2013
Recent data have shown that patients admitted to rooms previously occupied by a patient with C. difficile are at an increased risk of developing C. difficile infection. Thus, it seems logical that improving the efficacy of terminal disinfection would result in reduced rates of CDI. Furthermore, the scale of reduction in CDI incidence was remarkably similar to the study by Boyce et al. (37% vs. 39%), though in this previous study, the 39% hospital wide reduction was not statistically significant.
The major criticism of the study is that HPV and quadruple bleach disinfection were implemented more or less simultaneously so it’s not possible to attribute the reduction to HPV alone. This is complicated by the fact that quadruple bleach disinfection was implemented for all C. difficile rooms in mid-2008, 6 months prior to the introduction of HPV. So, it is possible in theory to do a sub-analysis of corresponding months during the period when quadruple bleach disinfection alone compared with HPV plus quadruple bleach disinfection was in operation. However, this sub-analysis was not performed. A previous study by the same group showed that quadruple bleach disinfection was necessary to eliminate A. baumannii and MRSA from surfaces, and that HPV was microbiologically superior to quadruple bleach disinfection. Thus, since HPV has time and efficiency savings compared with quadruple bleach disinfection, it is cost effective to use HPV in this setting.
The authors undertook a careful evaluation of hand hygiene and glove / gowning compliance, showing that these were not significantly different comparing the pre-intervention and intervention periods. They also evaluated the use of key antimicrobial agents and found that there were small but statistically significant changes in antimicrobial usage, which may have confounded the association with improved disinfection. However, levofloxacin use (one of the high risk CDI drugs) increased significantly in 2009 and there was still a significant reduction in CDI.
The paper includes some useful data on feasibility and safely aspects of implementing HPV, and the ‘priority scale’ (Appendix) for deciding which rooms were disinfected using HPV is rational and will help other hospitals decide on a similar priority scale.
Several other points of interest are reported. For example, the significant reduction in CDI was achieved whilst adhering to US C. difficile control guidelines, which recommend the use of gloves and alcohol based hand products (rather than hand washing with soap and water) for treating patients with CDI in endemic settings. They also held patients who had CDI in contact precautions for the duration of their stay, not just until symptoms resolved.
This study shows that more effective removal of C. difficile spores from the rooms of patients when they are discharged through enhanced conventional methods combined with the implementation of HPV reduces the hospital-wide incidence of CDI. The authors conclude: ‘implementation of an enhanced hospital-wide terminal cleaning program revolving around HPV decontamination of targeted hospital rooms was practical, safe, and associated with a significant reduction in the endemic rate of CDI at our hospital.’
Article citation: Manian FA, Griesnauer S, Bryant A. Implementation of hospital-wide enhanced terminal cleaning of targeted patient rooms and its impact on endemic Clostridium difficile infection rates. Am J Infect Control in press.

Hydrogen peroxide at war with catalase

Methicillin-resistant_Staphylococcus_aureus_b2340183_1

A study published by the UK Health Protection Agency highlights the fact that MRSA dried on surfaces appears to be less susceptible to hydrogen peroxide vapour (HPV) than bacterial endospores in the form of commercially produced biological indicators. This is a surprise because bacterial endospores are generally considered to be close to the top of the tree in terms of resistance to disinfection and sterilization. The answer lies in the enzyme catalase. Catalase breaks down hydrogen peroxide and is produced by MRSA but not by the metabolically inert spores. A previous study also showed that catalase-producing bacteria were less susceptible to HPV than bacteria that did not produce catalase and metabolically inert spores.

Bacterial endospore biological indicators (BIs) are typically used to monitor the efficacy of HPV systems. Does the finding that MRSA and probably other catalase-producing bacteria are less susceptible to HPV, “cell for spore”, than bacterial endospores challenge the use of BIs to monitor decontamination using HPV? In vitro susceptibility is important, but the resistance of a ‘system’ to HPV will be determined by a number of factors including the relative susceptibility of the organisms, suspending medium, substrate and inoculum. Thus, you’ll never get a “one-size-fits-all” monitoring system for HPV. BIs provide a stringent, repeatable, consistent and safe method to monitor the efficacy of HPV. Whilst they may not be top of the tree in terms of efficacy, BIs provide a useful yard-stick for monitoring efficacy.

Article citation: Pottage T, Macken S, Walker JT, Bennett AM. Meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus is more resistant to vaporized hydrogen peroxide than commercial Geobacillus stearothermophilus biological indicators. J Hosp Infect 2012; 80:41-5.

Do biofilms on dry hospital surfaces change how we think about hospital disinfection?

An important paper published in the Journal of Hospital Infection has identified biofilms on dry hospital surfaces. Biofilms are known to be important in several areas of medicine including indwelling medical devices and endoscope tubing, usually associated with surface-water interfaces. However, it was unclear whether biofilms formed on dry hospital surfaces. The study by Vickery et al. ‘destructively sampled’ several hospital surfaces after cleaning and disinfection using bleach (i.e. cut the materials out of the hospital environment and took them to the lab for analysis). Scanning electron microscopy was used to examine the surfaces for biofilms, which were identified on 5/6 surfaces: a curtain, a blind cord, a plastic door, a wash basin and a reagent bucket. Furthermore, MRSA was identified in the biofilm on three of the surfaces.

biofilm

Could it be that we have missed or underestimated the importance of biofilms on dry hospital surfaces? Biofilms could explain why vegetative bacteria can survive on dry hospital surfaces for so long, be part of the reason why they are so difficult to remove or inactivate using disinfectants (bacteria in biofilms can be 1000x more difficult to kill than corresponding planktonic bacteria) and explain to some degree the difficulty in recovering environmental pathogens by surface sampling.

Biofilms are clearly not the only reason for failures in hospital disinfection given the difficulty in achieving adequate distribution and contact time using manual methods, but these findings may have implications for infection control practices within hospitals and on the choice of the appropriate disinfectants used to decontaminate surfaces.

Article citation: Vickery K, Deva A, Jacombs A, Allan J, Valente P, Gosbell IB. Presence of biofilm containing viable multiresistant organisms despite terminal cleaning on clinical surfaces in an intensive care unit. J Hosp Infect 2012; 80: 52-55.

Image courtesy of the Lewis Lab at Northeastern University. Image created by Anthony D’Onofrio, William H. Fowle, Eric J. Stewart and Kim Lewis