» Articles » PMID: 36319080

Comparison of Floor Cleaning and Disinfection Processes in a Research Animal Facility

Overview
Date 2022 Nov 1
PMID 36319080
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Floor cleaning and disinfection are essential components of maintaining animal health status and meeting regulatory requirements in research vivaria. However, best practices for method, frequency, and evaluation techniques have not been established. Reuse of cotton string mop and bucket systems has been implicated in spreading contamination in the human hospital setting. We evaluated 4 different combinations of disinfectant and mop systems commonly used in rodent vivaria. Eight housing rooms were mopped a total of 4 times using one of the following methods: quaternary ammonium compound (QUAT) and cotton string mop (QC), QUAT and microfiber mop (QM), hydrogen peroxide disinfectant (HPD) and cotton string mop (HC), or HPD and microfiber mop (HM). ATP and RODAC samples of the floor were taken before and after mopping. The time to mop each room, floor drying time, and the amount of disinfectant used were recorded. The QC method was associated with significantly more bacterial contamination while all other methods significantly reduced bacterial contamination. The QC method performed significantly worse in reducing bacterial contamination as compared with all other methods when cotton mop heads were reused. All methods except QC significantly reduced ATP levels, with the HC and HM methods being significantly more effective at reducing ATP levels than the QC and QM methods. Costs were similar for the QC, QM, and HM methods. The results of this study indicate that reuse of cotton string mop heads with QUAT increases floor contamination while HPD is effective for up to 3 reuses. Single use microfiber mops were effective with both QUAT and HPD but did not result in more effective cleaning or disinfection than cotton string mops.

References
1.
Sanna T, Dallolio L, Raggi A, Mazzetti M, Lorusso G, Zanni A . ATP bioluminescence assay for evaluating cleaning practices in operating theatres: applicability and limitations. BMC Infect Dis. 2018; 18(1):583. PMC: 6245901. DOI: 10.1186/s12879-018-3505-y. View

2.
Esvelt M, Steiner L, Childs-Thor C, Dysko R, Villano J, Freeman Z . Variation in Bacterial Contamination of Microisolation Cage Tops According to Rodent Species and Housing System. J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci. 2019; 58(4):450-455. PMC: 6643085. DOI: 10.30802/AALAS-JAALAS-18-000126. View

3.
Quinn M, Fuller T, Bello A, Galligan C . Pollution prevention--occupational safety and health in hospitals: alternatives and interventions. J Occup Environ Hyg. 2006; 3(4):182-93. DOI: 10.1080/15459620600584295. View

4.
Engelbrecht K, Ambrose D, Sifuentes L, Gerba C, Weart I, Koenig D . Decreased activity of commercially available disinfectants containing quaternary ammonium compounds when exposed to cotton towels. Am J Infect Control. 2013; 41(10):908-11. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajic.2013.01.017. View

5.
Vesley D, Klapes N, Benzow K, Le C . Microbiological evaluation of wet and dry floor sanitization systems in hospital patient rooms. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1987; 53(5):1042-5. PMC: 203806. DOI: 10.1128/aem.53.5.1042-1045.1987. View