The NICU flora: An effective technique to sample surfaces.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
16
03
2021
accepted:
10
09
2021
entrez:
23
9
2021
pubmed:
24
9
2021
medline:
23
11
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Environmental surface sampling in healthcare settings is not routinely recommended. There are several methods for environmental surface sampling, however the yield of these methods is not well defined. The aim of the present study is to compare two methods of environmental surface sampling, to characterize the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) flora, compare it with rates of infection and colonization and correlate it with the workload. First, the yield of the swab and the gauze-pad methods were compared. Then, longitudinal surveillance of environmental surface sampling was performed over 6 months,once weekly, from pre-specified locations in the NICU. Samples were streaked onto selective media and bacterial colonies were identified using matrix-assisted laser desorption-ionization time-of-flight (MALDI-TOF). The number of colonies isolated using the gauze pad method was significantly higher compared with the swab method. Overall, 87 bacterial species of 30 different bacterial genera were identified on the NICU environmental surfaces. Of these, 18% species were potential pathogens, and the other represent skin and environmental flora. In 20% of clinical cultures and in 60% of colonization cultures, the pathogen was isolated from the infant's environment as well. The number of bacteria in environmental cultures was negatively correlated with nurse/patient ratio in the day prior to the culture. The gauze pad method for environmental sampling is robust and readily available. The NICU flora is very diverse and is closely related with the infants' flora, therefore it may serve as a reservoir for potential pathogens.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34555096
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0257821
pii: PONE-D-21-08619
pmc: PMC8460043
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0257821Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
MMWR Recomm Rep. 2003 Jun 6;52(RR-10):1-42
pubmed: 12836624
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2014 Aug;33(8):1371-9
pubmed: 24584718
Am J Infect Control. 2009 Aug;37(6):495-9
pubmed: 19162377
J Hosp Infect. 2001 Mar;47(3):223-9
pubmed: 11247683
PLoS One. 2013;8(1):e54703
pubmed: 23372757
J Clin Microbiol. 2003 Jan;41(1):192-6
pubmed: 12517847
J Clin Microbiol. 2013 Aug;51(8):2617-24
pubmed: 23740726
J Hosp Infect. 1989 Nov;14(4):363-8
pubmed: 2575636
Arch Intern Med. 2006 Oct 9;166(18):1945-51
pubmed: 17030826
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1999 Sep;20(9):598-603
pubmed: 10501256
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2011 Feb;32(2):185-7
pubmed: 21460476
Am J Med. 1991 Sep 16;91(3B):179S-184S
pubmed: 1928162
J Hosp Infect. 2002 Jan;50(1):18-24
pubmed: 11825047
Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2019 Nov;38(11):e301-e306
pubmed: 31626047
Pediatrics. 2002 Aug;110(2 Pt 1):285-91
pubmed: 12165580
J Perinatol. 2014 Nov;34(11):805-10
pubmed: 25010222
Clin Infect Dis. 2017 Oct 15;65(8):1412-1419
pubmed: 28520859
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1993 Aug;14(8):459-62
pubmed: 8376735
J Hosp Infect. 2013 Oct;85(2):149-54
pubmed: 23927924
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2011 Jul;32(7):687-99
pubmed: 21666400
Pediatrics. 2017 Jul;140(1):
pubmed: 28600447