Vesley D, Klapes N A, Benzow K, Le C T
Appl Environ Microbiol. 1987 May;53(5):1042-5. doi: 10.1128/aem.53.5.1042-1045.1987.
A new system for sanitizing floors in hospital patient rooms has been developed. The method consists of dry dusting with a cotton-blend, chemically treated (10% by dry mop weight) dust mop. This method was compared with a conventional cleaning protocol consisting of an initial predusting with the same nongermicidal chemical (3% by dry mop weight) followed by wet mopping with a fresh solution of a quaternary ammonium disinfectant-detergent. Each of six rooms was sampled by using RODAC plates (Becton Dickinson Labware, Oxnard, Calif.) on 10 consecutive days for each of the two methods. The study was initially performed during the summer and then repeated during the winter. Results imply that there is no significant difference between the new dry method (81.9% CFU reduction) and the conventional method (83.1% CFU reduction). Furthermore, the initial dry dusting step in the conventional method accounted for virtually all of the reduction by that method. Thus, wet mopping with a germicidal chemical produced no additional significant reduction of natural microbial populations on environmental surfaces beyond that achieved by dry dusting with dust-suppressant chemicals.
一种用于医院病房地面消毒的新系统已被开发出来。该方法包括用含化学药剂（占干拖把重量的10%）的混纺棉尘拖把进行干式除尘。此方法与传统清洁方案进行了比较，传统方案包括先用相同的非杀菌化学药剂（占干拖把重量的3%）进行预除尘，然后用新的季铵盐消毒清洁剂溶液进行湿拖。对于这两种方法，连续10天每天使用RODAC平板（Becton Dickinson Labware，加利福尼亚州奥克斯纳德）对六个房间中的每个房间进行采样。该研究最初在夏季进行，然后在冬季重复。结果表明，新的干式方法（菌落形成单位减少81.9%）与传统方法（菌落形成单位减少83.1%）之间没有显著差异。此外，传统方法中的初始干式除尘步骤几乎占了该方法减少量的全部。因此，用杀菌化学药剂进行湿拖，在减少环境表面自然微生物数量方面，并没有比用抑尘化学药剂进行干式除尘带来额外的显著减少。
