Flashlight contamination and effectiveness of two disinfectants in a stomatology hospital.
Dongye Yang, Liting Lin, Penghao Guo and 5 others
PMID 31406738WHAT IT FOUND
In a stomatology hospital, 31 of 41 flashlights were contaminated.
Wiping with 75% alcohol or CaviWipes left no positive swabs. The paper did not test whether this prevents patient infections.
Key findings
0131 of 41 flashlights were contaminated with bacteria and/or fungi, and Staphylococcus was the most common organism.
0216 of 17 doctors' flashlights exceeded the contamination standard, compared with 14 of 23 nurses' flashlights; S. aureus was found in 7 of 17 and 1 of 23, respectively.
03After disinfection, 0 of 20 alcohol-treated and 0 of 21 CaviWipes-treated flashlights were positive, and the two disinfectants were not significantly different.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
It was done in one stomatology hospital in Guangzhou in 2016, so it may not fit other settings or device types. The study included 41 flashlights, and the isolated patient flashlight was a single sample. It measured contamination on flashlights and hands, not patient infections, so it cannot show that disinfection prevents hospital infections. The paper reports positive rates and eligibility, not bacterial counts for each device, so the size of contamination cannot be compared in detail. The doctors' and nurses' flashlight comparison is observational; the paper gives possible reasons but did not test them.
Declared interests
Funded by the Extracurricular Scientific Research Program for Students of Sun Yat-Sen University. The authors declared no conflict of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read this as proof that disinfecting flashlights prevents hospital infections. The study measured bacteria on 41 flashlights and on healthcare workers' hands, and it did not follow patients to see whether infections changed.