Observational studyAntimicrobial resistance and infection control2026
Molecular epidemiology of multidrug-resistant organisms on mobile phones: an observational study conducted at a German university hospital.
Observational study in Antimicrobial resistance and infection control, 2026. 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.
- Study of Microbial Contamination of Mobile Phones of Dental and Medical Students and Its Potential Epidemiological Implications for Microbial Transmission.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
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
backgroundMobile phones are integral to modern clinical workflows and increasingly bridge clinical and private environments. Yet, their role as portable high-touch surfaces in infection prevention remains insufficiently characterized. We hence assessed prevalence and molecular epidemiology of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO) on mobile phones used by healthcare workers (HCWs) at a German university hospital and compared them with devices used by non-HCWs.
methodsIn this 30-month cross-sectional study, 232 HCW and 241 non-HCW mobile phones were analyzed to determine MDRO prevalence and overall bacterial count. A subset of devices was examined before and after disinfection with alcohol-based wipes. Whole genome sequencing with subsequent core genome multilocus sequence typing (cgMLST) was applied to identify clonal clusters.
resultsMDRO prevalence was significantly higher on HCW phones compared to non-HCW phones (15.1% vs. 0.4%, p < 0.001), with particularly high rates on intensive care unit devices and shared phones (23.4% and 23.0%, respectively). Vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium, predominantly the endemic ST117/CT71 clone, and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus were detected on 11.2% and 4.7% of devices, respectively. In contrast, no multidrug-resistant Gram-negatives (MDRGN) were identified, despite contamination with susceptible Enterobacterales or nonfermenters. cgMLST analyses revealed clonal MDRO strains mainly within wards and only rarely across wards, consistent with both local clustering and possible cross-ward dissemination. Total bacterial count did not predict MDRO detection. Alcohol-based wipes reliably eliminated MDRO from all tested devices.
conclusionsGiven the high MDRO burden on HCW mobile phones and genomic clustering across wards, mobile phones may represent a relevant reservoir with potential to facilitate in-hospital MDRO dissemination. Standardized mobile phone disinfection routines - particularly for shared and ICU devices - should be considered in infection prevention strategies to reduce potential phone-associated MDRO transmission risk and may represent a conceptual "Sixth Moment" complementing the WHO "Five Moments for Hand Hygiene".
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.