Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38865328›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Disinfection of sink drains to reduce a source of three opportunistic pathogens, during Serratia marcescens clusters in a neonatal intensive care unit.

Thibault Bourdin, Marie-Ève Benoit, Michèle Prévost, Dominique Charron, Caroline Quach, Eric Déziel, Philippe Constant, Emilie Bédard

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Genomic epidemiological analysis of a single-centre polyclonal outbreak ofEuro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2024
    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

8 authors.

Thibault BourdinINRS-Armand-Frappier Santé Biotechnologie, Laval, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-5257-9374
Marie-Ève BenoitCHU Sainte-Justine Research Center, Montréal, QC, Canada.
Michèle PrévostPolytechnique Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada.
Dominique CharronPolytechnique Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada.
Caroline QuachCHU Sainte-Justine, Université de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada.
Eric DézielINRS-Armand-Frappier Santé Biotechnologie, Laval, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-4609-0115
Philippe ConstantINRS-Armand-Frappier Santé Biotechnologie, Laval, QC, Canada.
Emilie BédardPolytechnique Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-1447-929X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveEvaluate the effects of five disinfection methods on bacterial concentrations in hospital sink drains, focusing on three opportunistic pathogens (OPs): Serratia marcescens, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia.

designOver two years, three sampling campaigns were conducted in a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Samples from 19 sink drains were taken at three time points: before, during, and after disinfection. Bacterial concentration was measured using culture-based and flow cytometry methods. High-throughput short sequence typing was performed to identify the three OPs and assess S. marcescens persistence after disinfection at the genotypic level.

settingThis study was conducted in a pediatric hospitals NICU in Montréal, Canada, which is divided in an intensive and intermediate care side, with individual rooms equipped with a sink.

interventionsFive treatments were compared: self-disinfecting drains, chlorine disinfection, boiling water disinfection, hot tap water flushing, and steam disinfection.

resultsThis study highlights significant differences in the effectiveness of disinfection methods. Chlorine treatment proved ineffective in reducing bacterial concentration, including the three OPs. In contrast, all other drain interventions resulted in an immediate reduction in culturable bacteria (4-8 log) and intact cells (2-3 log). Thermal methods, particularly boiling water and steam treatments, exhibited superior effectiveness in reducing bacterial loads, including OPs. However, in drains with well-established bacterial biofilms, clonal strains of S. marcescens recolonized the drains after heat treatments.

conclusionsOur study supports thermal disinfection (>80°C) for pathogen reduction in drains but highlights the need for additional trials and the implementation of specific measures to limit biofilm formation.

Indexed as

DisinfectionIntensive Care Units, NeonatalSerratia marcescensCross InfectionHumansInfant, NewbornPseudomonas aeruginosaSerratia InfectionsStenotrophomonas maltophilia

Identifiers

PMID38865328
PMCPMC11168660

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.