ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2022
Efficacy of Five Disinfectant Products Commonly Used in Pig Herds against a Panel of Bacteria Sensitive and Resistant to Selected Antimicrobials.
Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genetic resistance confers protection against clinical severity, intestinal colonization, and mortality in weaned pigs experimentally challenged with pathogenic F18 and F4 InPECTranslational animal science · 2026Article
- Cross-Sectional Study: Assessing the Presence of Stx2e-ProducingPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- A Critical Review of AMR Risks Arising as a Consequence of Using Biocides and Certain Metals in Food Animal Production.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The growing threat of antimicrobial resistance worldwide has led to an increasing concern in the human, veterinary, and environmental fields, highlighting the need for strategies to effectively control bacterial contamination. Correct biosecurity practices, including the appropriate use of disinfectants, play a crucial role in controlling bacterial contamination. This study aimed to verify whether the recommended concentrations defined according to the Defra General Orders concentration (GO, published by the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs' disinfectant-approval scheme) of five commercial disinfectant preparations (peroxygen-based, phenol-based, two halogen-releasing agents, and glutaraldehyde/quaternary ammonium compound-based; disinfectants A to E, respectively) were sufficient to inhibit growth and inactivate selected bacterial strains, including some that carry known phenotypic patterns of multidrug resistance. The effectiveness of each disinfectant was expressed as the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) and minimum bactericidal concentration (MBC) values, determined by the broth-microdilution method. The results indicate that the type of disinfectant and its concentration influence the inhibitory and bactericidal efficacy. The glutaraldehyde/quaternary ammonium compound-based (disinfectant D) and chlorocresol-based products (disinfectant B) were the most effective, and the GO concentration was bactericidal in all the strains tested. The efficacy of the other compounds varied, depending on the bacterial species tested. The GO concentrations were at least able to inhibit the bacterial growth in all the products and bacterial strains tested. A greater tolerance to the compounds was observed in the strains of
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.