Recovery efficiency of two glove-sampling methods

Recovery efficiency of two glove-sampling methods

Two methods to sample pathogens from gloved hands were compared: direct imprint onto agar and a sponge-wipe method. The sponge method was significantly better at recovering Clostridiodes difficile spores, and no difference was observed between the methods at 101 inoculum for carbapenemase-producing...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Infection control and hospital epidemiology 2022-03, Vol.43 (3), p.390-392
Hauptverfasser: Lyons, Amanda K, Rose, Laura J, Noble-Wang, Judith
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Acinetobacter baumannii
Anti-Bacterial Agents
Antibiotics
Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae
Cellulose
Gloves
Hands
Health care
Health services
Humans
Hygiene
Intervention
Klebsiella pneumoniae
Laboratories
Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus
Methods
Microbial Sensitivity Tests
Pathogens
Public health
Recovery (Medical)
Sampling methods
Staphylococcus infections
Volunteers
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Two methods to sample pathogens from gloved hands were compared: direct imprint onto agar and a sponge-wipe method. The sponge method was significantly better at recovering Clostridiodes difficile spores, and no difference was observed between the methods at 101 inoculum for carbapenemase-producing KPC+ Klebsiella pneumoniae, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, and Acinetobacter baumannii.
ISSN:0899-823X
1559-6834
1559-6834
DOI:10.1017/ice.2021.53