Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31553747›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Decontamination of aerosolised bacteria from a pig farm environment using a pH neutral electrochemically activated solution (Ecas4 anolyte).

Sangay Tenzin, Abiodun David Ogunniyi, Manouchehr Khazandi, Sergio Ferro, Jonathon Bartsch, Simon Crabb, Sam Abraham, Permal Deo, Darren J Trott

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Sangay TenzinAustralian Centre for Antimicrobial Resistance Ecology, School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Roseworthy SA, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1662-362X
Abiodun David OgunniyiAustralian Centre for Antimicrobial Resistance Ecology, School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Roseworthy SA, Australia.
Manouchehr KhazandiAustralian Centre for Antimicrobial Resistance Ecology, School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Roseworthy SA, Australia.
Sergio FerroEcas4 Australia Pty. Ltd., Mile End South SA, Australia.
Jonathon BartschDr Barry Lloyd Pty. Ltd., Gawler SA, Australia.
Simon CrabbEcas4 Australia Pty. Ltd., Mile End South SA, Australia.
Sam AbrahamSchool of Veterinary and Life Sciences, Murdoch University, Murdoch WA, Australia.
Permal DeoSchool of Pharmacy and Medical Sciences, University of South Australia, City East Campus, Playford P1-25, Adelaide SA, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6477-9127
Darren J TrottAustralian Centre for Antimicrobial Resistance Ecology, School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Roseworthy SA, Australia.
The University of Adelaide · AUMurdoch University · AUUniversity of South Australia · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

An electrochemically activated solution (ECAS), generated by electrolysis of a dilute sodium chloride solution in a four-chamber electrolytic cell (Ecas4), was tested as a sanitising aerosol in eliminating bacteria from the environment of a weaning room vacated 24-48h earlier, at a continuous flow pig farm. An ultrasonic humidifier was used to fill the environment with a fog (droplets with diameters of 1-5 μm) containing 0.25 ppm of hypochlorous acid. The weaning room was fogged for 3 min at 30 min intervals during five hours of aerosol disinfection. An innovative sample treatment with propidium monoazide dye in conjunction with cyclonic air sampling was optimised and adapted for discerning live/dead bacteria in subsequent molecular quantification steps. Without fogging, total bacterial load ranged from 5.06 ± 0.04 to 5.75 ± 0.04 Log10 CFU/m3. After the first hour of fogging, a 78% total bacterial reduction was observed, which further increased to > 97% after the second hour, > 99.4% after the third and 99.8% after the fourth hour, finally resulting in a 99.99% reduction from the farm environment over five hours. Unlike the current formaldehyde spray disinfection protocol, which requires a long empty period because of its hazardous properties, this economically viable and environmentally friendly disinfection protocol may significantly lower downtime. Moreover, ECAS fogging can be easily adapted to a variety of applications, including the elimination of pathogens from livestock farm air environment for disease prevention, as well as decontamination after disease outbreaks.

Indexed as

FarmsActinobacillus pleuropneumoniaeAerosolsAir MicrobiologyAnimalsBacteriaBacterial InfectionsBacterial LoadDecontaminationDisinfectantsElectrolysisFumigationHumidifiersHydrogen-Ion ConcentrationHypochlorous AcidMethicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureusAerosolsDisinfectantsHypochlorous Acid

Identifiers

PMID31553747
PMCPMC6760800
OpenAlexW2976061934

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.