ArticleRisk management and healthcare policy2025
Adenosine Triphosphate Bioluminescence Assay versus Microbiological Swab Culture in the Evaluation of Surface Sanitation in a Pediatric Hospital in Romania.
Article in Risk management and healthcare policy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Impact of an Enhanced Disinfection Protocol on the Incidence ofJournal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to compare two rapid testing methods - Adenosine Triphosphate (ATP) quantification and the total Aerobic Colony Count (ACC) by bioluminescence assay with the standard method - microbiological swab culture. The goal was to determine the advantages and limitations of these rapid alternative tests in assessing the sanitary condition of hospital surfaces. Methods: A total of 88 samples were collected from various surfaces (stainless steel, metal, plastic, Tarkett, ceramic, glass, textile) in medical and surgical wards of a pediatric hospital. For each tested area, one sample underwent standard microbiological culture (25 cm²), and two adjacent samples (each 100 cm²) were analyzed using the ENSURE Results: The Ultrasnap system identified 25 non-conforming samples; Microsnap Total found 13 non-conforming samples, while microbiological culture revealed one non-conforming sample and an additional 11 with low but detectable bacterial presence. The Ultrasnap method recorded a sensitivity of 100%, a specificity of 72.41% and an accuracy of 72.73%. In comparison, the Microsnap Total system showed higher specificity and accuracy (85.05% and 84.09%, respectively), but failed to identify the positive (non-conforming) test, resulting in a 0% positive predictive value. Conclusion: The study highlighted several advantages of rapid ATP tests, particularly their ease of use, their ability to provide results in just 10 seconds for Ultrasnap and approximately 7 hours for Microsnap Total, and their capacity to accurately identify well-sanitized surfaces. Additionally, Ultrasnap proved to be a sensitive indicator of residual organic matter, enhancing the capacity to distinguish between different sanitation levels and allowing cleaning and disinfection practices to be adjusted in real time, thereby reducing the risk of cross-transmission.
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.