A realistic approach for evaluating antimicrobial surfaces for dry surface exposure scenarios.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic has raised public awareness about the importance of hygiene, leading to an increased demand for antimicrobial surfaces to minimize microbial contamination on high-touch surfaces. This is particularly relevant in public and private transportation settings, where surfaces frequently touched by individuals pose a significant, yet preventable, risk of infection transmission. Typically, the antimicrobial activity of surfaces is tested using test methods of the International Standards Organization, American Society for Testing and Materials, or Japanese Industrial Standards, which involve complete submersion in liquid, elevated temperature (37°C), and prolonged (24 h) contact periods. However, these conditions do not accurately represent real-world scenarios where surfaces are exposed to air. In this study, we propose a modified test method designed to better reflect real-life conditions in the intended end-use setting. The modifications included using deionized water instead of nutrient broth while preparing bacterial inoculum, applying a small test inoculum to the surface and allowing it to dry, maintaining ambient temperature and relative humidity throughout the contact period, and reducing the contact period to 4 h. With this modified approach, the antimicrobial activity of 20 samples was reassessed. This screening revealed that out of 20 samples, only 2 samples were effective against all species, while 8 samples demonstrated partial effectiveness against selected species, and 10 samples showed no significant effect. These findings highlight the inadequacy of the current test standard and emphasize the urgent necessity for revised and adapted testing method to ensure a reliable and accurate evaluation.IMPORTANCEThe recent severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic has sparked increased demand for antimicrobial surfaces to mitigate the risk of fomites-transmitted infection in both indoors and confined spaces. Commonly, the antimicrobial activity of these surfaces is assessed using test standards established by national standards bodies, which do not distinguish between different application scenarios. While these test standards are suitable for surfaces intended for submerged application, they are inappropriate for antimicrobial surfaces designed for dry surface exposure. The usage of these standards can lead to an overestimation of antimicrobial efficacy. Thus, this study introduces a modified dry exposure test method aimed at better reflecting real-life conditions in the intended end-use setting. Our results revealed the subpar antimicrobial performance of numerous samples, highlighting the necessity to revise and tailor the universal test standard to real-world scenarios in order to ensure a reliable and accurate evaluation.