Research Output
Systematic review on use, cost and clinical efficacy of automated decontamination devices
  Background
More evidence is emerging on the role of surface decontamination for reducing hospital-acquired infection (HAI). Timely and adequate removal of environmental pathogens leads to measurable clinical benefit in both routine and outbreak situations.

Objectives
This systematic review aimed to evaluate published studies describing the effect of automated technologies delivering hydrogen peroxide (H202) or ultra-violet (UV) light on HAI rates.

Methods
A systematic review was performed using relevant search terms. Databases were scanned from January 2005 to March 2020 for studies reporting clinical outcome after use of automated devices on healthcare surfaces. Information collected included device type, overall findings; hospital and ward data; study location, length and size; antimicrobial consumption; domestic monitoring; and infection control interventions. Study sponsorship and duplicate publications were also noted.

Results
While there are clear benefits from non-touch devices in vitro, we found insufficient objective assessment of patient outcome due to the before-and-after nature of 36 of 43 (84%) studies. Of 43 studies, 20 (47%) used hydrogen peroxide (14 for outbreaks) and 23 (53%) used UV technology (none for outbreaks). The most popular pathogen targeted, either alone or in combination with others, was Clostridium difficile (27 of 43 studies: 63%), followed by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) (16 of 43: 37%). Many owed funding and/or personnel to industry sponsorship (28 of 43: 65%) and most were confounded by concurrent infection control, antimicrobial stewardship and/or cleaning audit initiatives. Few contained data on device costs and rarely on comparable costs (1 of 43: 2%). There were expected relationships between the country hosting the study and location of device companies. None mentioned the potential for environmental damage, including effects on microbial survivors.

Conclusion
There were mixed results for patient benefit from this review of automated devices using H202 or UV for surface decontamination. Most non-outbreak studies lacked an appropriate control group and were potentially compromised by industry sponsorship. Concern over HAI encourages delivery of powerful disinfectants for eliminating pathogens without appreciating toxicity or cost benefit. Routine use of these devices requires justification from standardized and controlled studies to understand how best to manage contaminated healthcare environments.

  • Type:

    Article

  • Date:

    12 February 2021

  • Publication Status:

    Published

  • Publisher

    Springer Science and Business Media LLC

  • DOI:

    10.1186/s13756-021-00894-y

  • Cross Ref:

    10.1186/s13756-021-00894-y

  • ISSN:

    2047-2994

  • Funders:

    Edinburgh Napier Funded

Citation

Dancer, S. J., & King, M. (2021). Systematic review on use, cost and clinical efficacy of automated decontamination devices. Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control, 10(1), https://doi.org/10.1186/s13756-021-00894-y

Authors

Keywords

Decontamination, Environment, Hospital-acquired infection, Ultraviolet light, Hydrogen peroxide, Toxicity, Cost

Monthly Views:

Available Documents
  • pdf

    Systematic Review On Use, Cost And Clinical Efficacy Of Automated Decontamination Devices

    14MB

    This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

  • Downloadable citations

    HTML BIB RTF