Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T19:55:48.774Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Assessment of Prehospital Monitor/Defibrillators for Clostridioides difficile Contamination

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 April 2021

Cody Vaughn Gibson Open the ORCID record for Cody Vaughn Gibson [Opens in a new window] ,
Jonathan Edwin Swindell  and
George Donald Collier
Cody Vaughn Gibson*
Affiliation:
Department of Natural Sciences, Calhoun Community College, Decatur, AlabamaUSA Biological Sciences Research Group, Calhoun Community College, Decatur, AlabamaUSA
Jonathan Edwin Swindell
Affiliation:
Biological Sciences Research Group, Calhoun Community College, Decatur, AlabamaUSA
George Donald Collier
Affiliation:
Department of Natural Sciences, Calhoun Community College, Decatur, AlabamaUSA Biological Sciences Research Group, Calhoun Community College, Decatur, AlabamaUSA
*
Correspondence: Cody Vaughn Gibson 6250 US Highway 31 N Decatur, Alabama, 35609USA E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives:

The purpose of this study was to determine if Clostridioides difficile (C. diff) was present on the electrocardiogram (ECG) right arm leads, blood pressure cuffs, and fingertip pulse oximetry sensors of monitor/defibrillators used in the prehospital setting.

Methods:

On March 22, 2019, a total of 20 prehospital monitor/defibrillators located at an Emergency Medical Service (EMS) station in Alabama (USA) were assessed for C. diff. The inside area of the fingertip pulse oximetry sensor, patient contact side of the blood pressure cuff, and right arm ECG lead of monitor/defibrillators (n = 60) were swabbed using a sterile cotton-tipped applicator saturated in a 0.85% Sodium Chloride solution. These cotton-tipped applicators were then inserted, scored, and released into Banana Broth vials. The vials were then sealed tightly and immediately transported to the laboratory, where they were incubated at 36°C for 72 hours. Colorimetric change from red to yellow was considered a positive indication for the presence of C. diff.

Results:

Of 20 blood pressure cuffs, 15 had C. diff contamination (75%); C. diff was also present on 19 of 20 fingertip pulse oximeter sensors (95%) and 20 of 20 ECG right arm monitor leads (100%).

Conclusion:

Prehospital monitor/defibrillators may represent a significant reservoir of C. diff and other pathogenic bacteria. Improved disinfection protocols for reusable monitoring equipment and transition to disposable monitoring equipment used in the prehospital setting may reduce the risk of patient and EMS provider infection.

Keywords

bacterialemergency ambulance systeminfectious diseaseparamedicprehospital
Type
Original Research
Information
Prehospital and Disaster Medicine , Volume 36 , Issue 4 , August 2021 , pp. 412 - 413
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine

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

Lessa, F, Gould, C, McDonald, L. Current status of Clostridium difficile infection epidemiology. Clin Infect Dis. 2012;55(Suppl 2):S65–S70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kazakova, S, Baggs, J, McDonald, L, et al. Association between antibiotic use and hospital-onset Clostridioides difficile infection in US acute care hospitals, 2006-2012: an ecologic analysis. Clin Infect Dis. 2019;70(1):11–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balsells, E, Filipescu, T, Kyaw, M, et al. Infection prevention and control of Clostridium difficile: a global review of guidelines, strategies, and recommendations. J Glob Health. 2016;6(2):020410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, C. Emergency medical services oxygen equipment: a fomite for transmission of MRSA? Emerg Med J. 2019;36(2):89–91.Google ScholarPubMed