ReviewAntimicrobial resistance and infection control2022
The in situ efficacy of whole room disinfection devices: a literature review with practical recommendations for implementation.
Review in Antimicrobial resistance and infection control, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- UV-C LED Disinfection of Flexible Rhinolaryngoscopes: Microbiological, Economic, Environmental, and Legislative Evaluation.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2026Article
- Effectiveness of Hydrogen Peroxide Nebulization Combined with Manual Cleaning in Reducing Surface-Associated Microorganisms in an Indoor Fitness Environment.Microorganisms · 2026Article
- Value of whole-process quality control management in central sterile supply department nursing practice and nosocomial infection prevention.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2026Article
- Efficacy of Antimicrobial Dry Fog in Improving the Environmental Microbial Burden in an Inpatient Ward.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Performance of an Autonomous Sanitary Sterilisation Ultraviolet Machine (ASSUM) on terminal disinfection of surgical theaters and rooms of an intensive-intermediate care unit.Infection prevention in practice · 2024Article
- Hand and environmental hygiene: respective roles for MRSA, multi-resistant gram negatives, Clostridioides difficile, and Candida spp.Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2024Review
- The Impact ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Description and results of a new method for assessing real-life performance of a UV-C disinfection robot.Infection prevention in practice · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTerminal cleaning and disinfection of hospital patient rooms must be performed after discharge of a patient with a multidrug resistant micro-organism to eliminate pathogens from the environment. Terminal disinfection is often performed manually, which is prone to human errors and therefore poses an increased infection risk for the next patients. Automated whole room disinfection (WRD) replaces or adds on to the manual process of disinfection and can contribute to the quality of terminal disinfection. While the in vitro efficacy of WRD devices has been extensively investigated and reviewed, little is known about the in situ efficacy in a real-life hospital setting. In this review, we summarize available literature on the in situ efficacy of WRD devices in a hospital setting and compare findings to the in vitro efficacy of WRD devices. Moreover, we offer practical recommendations for the implementation of WRD devices.
methodsThe in situ efficacy was summarized for four commonly used types of WRD devices: aerosolized hydrogen peroxide, H
resultsIn total, 54 articles were included. Articles reporting environmental outcomes of WRD devices had large variation in methodology, reported outcome measures, preparation of the patient room prior to environmental sampling, the location of sampling within the room and the moment of sampling. For the clinical outcome measures, all included articles reported the infection rate. Overall, these studies consistently showed that automated disinfection using any of the four types of WRD is effective in reducing environmental and clinical outcomes.
conclusionDespite the large variation in the included studies, the four automated WRD systems are effective in reducing the amount of pathogens present in a hospital environment, which was also in line with conclusions from in vitro studies. Therefore, the assessment of what WRD device would be most suitable in a specific healthcare setting mostly depends on practical considerations.
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.