ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2024
The antibacterial performance of a residual disinfectant against
Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Real-world testing of the durability claims of a commercially available spray-on surface biocide.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2025Article
- Application of chlorine dioxide and its disinfection mechanism.Archives of microbiology · 2024Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Environmental surfaces play a key role in transmitting pathogens that can survive on surfaces for long durations. The interest in long-lasting or residual disinfectants are, therefore, growing as it might protect surfaces for longer than traditional disinfectants. In this study, a quat-based product claiming residual disinfecting performance against bacteria, among other microorganisms, was tested using an approved standardized method, in a controlled laboratory study and on environmental surfaces in an office building. The results obtained showed that the residual disinfectant can reduce the bacterial counts significantly compared to a traditional quat-based disinfectant when used on horizontal surfaces, twenty-four hours after application. During the standardized test method, the residual disinfectant provided a 6-log reduction, whereas the traditional disinfectant provided only a 1.9-log reduction. Similarly, the residual disinfectant provided a 2.5 log reduction in the laboratory study, whereas the traditional disinfectant had too-numerous-to-count colonies. When tested on environmental surfaces, an ANOVA statistical analysis indicated that surfaces treated with the residual disinfectant had significantly less bacteria present twenty-four hours after application. The antibacterial performance of the residual disinfectant showed to be limited by the orientation of the treated surface, and the thickness of the product film dried on the surface. This study showed the potential of residual disinfectants that warrants further investigation and could potentially aid the further development of the technology.
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.