Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-m9kch Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-17T09:13:37.513Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Comparing UV-C dosages of emitter placement strategies in a community hospital setting

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 December 2022

Cody W. Haag*
Affiliation:
Clean Sweep Group, Los Angeles, California, United States
George Holliday
Affiliation:
Clean Sweep Group, Los Angeles, California, United States
Kenneth Archulet
Affiliation:
Providence Holy Cross Medical Center, Mission Hills, California, United States
Weiming Tang
Affiliation:
University of North Carolina Project–China, Guangzhou, China Institute for Global Health and Infectious Diseases, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States Gillings Global School of Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States
*
Author for correspondence: Cody W. Haag, E-mail: cwh.address@gmail.com.

Abstract

We measured the amount of UV-C light (254 nm) achieved on hospital surfaces using a modified emitter and competing placement strategies. An autonomous UV-C strategy improved exposure on surfaces that were distant, angled, or shadowed to the nonautonomous strategies, leading to significantly higher overall UV-C dosages.

Type
Concise Communication
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Rutala, W, Weber, D. Best practices for disinfection of noncritical environmental surfaces and equipment in healthcare facilities: a bundle approach. Am J Infect Control 2019;47 suppl:A96A105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kowalski, W. UVGI safety. In: Ultraviolet Germicidal Irradiation Handbook. Berlin: Springer; 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Masse, V, Hartley, MJ, Edmond, MB, Diekema, DJ. Comparing and optimizing ultraviolet germicidal irradiation systems use for patient room terminal disinfection: an exploratory study using radiometry and commercial test cards. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control 2018;7:29.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raeiszadeh, M, Adeli, B. A critical review on ultraviolet disinfection systems against COVID-19 outbreak: applicability, validation, and safety considerations. ACS Photonics 2020;7:29412951.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boyce, J, Farrel, P, Towle, D, Fekieta, R, Aniskiewicz, M. Impact of room location on UV-C irradiance and UV-C dosage and antimicrobial effect delivered by a mobile UV-C light device. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2016;37:667672.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fredes, P, Raff, U, Gramsch, E, Tarkowski, M. Estimation of the ultraviolet-C doses from mercury lamps and light-emitting diodes required to disinfect surfaces. J Res Nat Inst Stand Technol 2021;126:126014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGinn, C, Scott, R, Donnelly, N, et al. Exploring the applicability of robot-assisted UV disinfection in radiology. Front Robot AI 2020. doi: 10.3389/frobt.2020.590306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cadnum, J, Jencson, A, Gestrich, S, et al. A comparison of the efficacy of multiple ultraviolet light room decontamination devices in a radiology procedure room. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2019;40:158163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Efficacy TESTING of a UV light device. EMSL Analytical website. https://f.hubspotusercontent30.net/hubfs/7084385/OhmniClean/EMSL%20Testing%20Results.pdf. Published 2021. Accessed November 22, 2022.Google Scholar
Chang, J, Ossoff, S, Lobe, D, Dorfman, M, Dumais, C, Qualls, R, Johnson, J. UV inactivation of pathogenic and indicator microorganisms. Appl Environ Microbiol 1985;49:13611365.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Supplementary material: File

Haag et al. supplementary material

Tables S1-S2

Download Haag et al. supplementary material(File)
File 24.9 KB