• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

The assessment of the bactericidal activity of surface disinfectants. II. Two other practical tests.

作者信息

Reybrouck G

机构信息

Public Health Laboratory, School of Public Health, University of Leuven, Belgium.

出版信息

Zentralbl Hyg Umweltmed. 1990 Dec;190(5-6):492-9.

PMID:2127891
Abstract

The Dutch quantitative carrier test (QCT) prescribes the rinsing technique for counting the surviving bacteria after disinfection. This method is compared with the Leuven test, which uses the impression technique in order to determine the survival on the disinfected surfaces, and with a novel quantitative surface disinfection test (QSDT). The QSDT combines the preparatory and disinfection phase of the Leuven test with the postexposure rinsing technique of the QCT. The results of the three tests correlate very well as is shown by Kendall's rank correlation test. The QCT and the Leuven test yield equivalent results: neither the median of the results, nor the paired results apart differ statistically for the same exposure time of 30 min. On the contrary the results of the novel QSDT differ in a statistically significant way from those of both other techniques, but the QSDT is more severe than the QCT and the Leuven test in the case of Staphylococcus aureus, whereas in the case of Pseudomonas aeruginosa it is the less severe one. This phenomenon can hardly be explained and emphasizes the importance of the resuscitation of sublethally damaged germs in the postexposure phase of testing.

摘要

相似文献

1
The assessment of the bactericidal activity of surface disinfectants. II. Two other practical tests.
Zentralbl Hyg Umweltmed. 1990 Dec;190(5-6):492-9.
2
The assessment of the bactericidal activity of surface disinfectants. III. Practical tests for surface disinfection.表面消毒剂杀菌活性的评估。III. 表面消毒的实际测试。
Zentralbl Hyg Umweltmed. 1990 Dec;190(5-6):500-10.
3
The assessment of the bactericidal activity of surface disinfectants. I. A comparison of three practical tests.
Zentralbl Hyg Umweltmed. 1990 Dec;190(5-6):479-91.
4
The assessment of the bactericidal activity of surface disinfectants. IV. The AOAC use-dilution method and the Kelsey-Sykes test.表面消毒剂杀菌活性的评估。IV. AOAC使用稀释法和凯尔西-赛克斯试验。
Zentralbl Hyg Umweltmed. 1992 Feb;192(5):432-7.
5
The assessment of the bactericidal activity of surface disinfectants. V. Correlation of the tests with practice.
Zentralbl Hyg Umweltmed. 1992 Feb;192(5):438-46.
6
[The determination of the bacterial effectiveness of surface disinfectants using suspension tests].[使用悬液试验测定表面消毒剂的细菌有效性]
Zentralbl Hyg Umweltmed. 1991 Mar;191(2-3):206-15.
7
[Quantitative recovery of bacteria from different germ carrier materials].
Zentralbl Hyg Umweltmed. 1990 May;190(1-2):141-53.
8
Comparative evaluation of biofilm disinfectant efficacy tests.生物膜消毒剂功效测试的比较评估
J Microbiol Methods. 2007 Aug;70(2):236-44. doi: 10.1016/j.mimet.2007.04.010. Epub 2007 Apr 25.
9
[The effectiveness of disinfectants from kinetic viewpoints].
Zentralbl Hyg Umweltmed. 1990 May;190(1-2):154-76.
10
[Bactericidal efficacy of a disinfectant by AFNOR standards NF T 72-150 and NF T 72-151. A collaborative study].[依据法国标准化协会标准NF T 72 - 150和NF T 72 - 151测定消毒剂的杀菌效果。一项协作研究]
Pathol Biol (Paris). 1984 Jun;32(5 Pt 2):623-7.