Avaliação da eficiência da limpeza e desinfecção de superfícies em uma unidade básica de saúde

Aires Garcia dos Santos Junior; Adriano Menis Ferreira; Marcelo Alessandro Rigotti; Fernando Ribeiro dos Santos; Mara Cristina Ribeiro Furlan

Aires Garcia dos Santos Junior Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul (UFMS) (Coxim, Mato Grosso do Sul, Brasil)
Adriano Menis Ferreira Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul (UFMS) (Coxim, Mato Grosso do Sul, Brasil)
Marcelo Alessandro Rigotti Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul (UFMS) (Coxim, Mato Grosso do Sul, Brasil)
Fernando Ribeiro dos Santos Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul (UFMS) (Coxim, Mato Grosso do Sul, Brasil)
Mara Cristina Ribeiro Furlan Escola de Enfermagem de Ribeirão Preto (EERP). Universidade de São Paulo (USP) (Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brasil)

Palabras clave: Atención Primaria de Salud, Seguridad del Paciente, Gestión de la Calidad, Educación en Salud, Desinfección

Key-words: Primary health care, Patient safety, Quality management, Health education, Disinfection

Palavras chave: Atenção primária à saúde, Segurança do paciente, Gestão da qualidade, Educação em saúde, Desinfecção

Resumen

Objetivo: evaluar el efecto de intervenciones educativa en la limpieza y desinfección de superficies en una unidad básica de salud. Métodos: se trata de un estudio prospectivo, analítico con abordaje cuantitativo. El estudio fue realizado en una Unidad Básica de Salud, donde actúan dos equipos de Estrategia de Saúde da Familia. Se optó por evaluar la limpieza y desinfección de las superficies: carro de curado, mostrador de recepción, mesa ginecológica, maca del paciente y mesa de consulta de enfermería, utilizando los métodos de monitoreo: evaluación visual, conteo de unidades formadoras de colonias y la medición de adenosina trifosfato. Se utilizaron para el análisis estadístico la prueba de puestos de Wilcoxon y la prueba de Mann-Whitney, se consideró un nivel de significancia del 5% o (p <0,05). Resultados: se obtuvo un total de 720 evaluaciones realizadas al término de todas las fases. En la fase I se obtuvo una tasa de reprobación del 57,5%, 20,0% y 90,0%; después de la intervención educativa, los cuantitativos de reprobación a corto plazo disminuyeron a 0,0%, 2,5,0% y 50,0% (datos de la fase III) y, a largo plazo, al 5,0%, 0, 0% y 65% (datos de la fase IV) para los métodos visual, Adenosina Trifosfato y cultivo, respectivamente. La inspección visual fue el método que presentó mayor frecuencia de superficies reprobadas en las fases I y IV. Conclusión: hubo reducción de la carga microbiana y valores de las lecturas de adenosina trifosfato; aunque esta reducción no fue estadísticamente significativa a todas las superficies. Se constató que la intervención educativa fue eficiente

Abstract

Objective: to evaluate the effect of educatival interventions in the cleaning and disinfection of surfaces in a health center. Method: this is a prospective analytical study with a quantitative approach, carried out in a health center where two Estratégia Saúde da Família teams work. The surfaces chosen to be evaluated for their cleaning and disinfection were from: the dressing trolleys; reception desks; gynecological examination tables; patient stretchers; and nursing consultation tables. The monitoring methods used were: visual evaluation; counting of colony-forming units; and measurement of adenosine triphosphate. The Wilcoxon test and the Mann-Whitney test were used for the statistical analysis, considering a significance level of 5% or (p<0.05). Results: a total of 720 evaluations were performed at the end of all phases. In phase I, failure rates of 57.5%, 20.0%, and 90.0% were observed. After the educational intervention, the quantitative short-term disapprovals decreased to 0.0%, 2.5%, and 50.0% (data from phase III) and, in the long term, to 5.0%, 0.0%, and 65% (data from phase IV) for the visual, adenosine triphosphate, and culture methods, respectively. Visual inspection was the method that presented the highest frequency of disapproved surfaces in phases I and IV. Conclusion: the microbial load and the values of the adenosine triphosphate readings were reduced. Although this reduction was not statistically significant for all surfaces. The educational intervention was considered efficient

Resumo

Objetivo: avaliar o efeito de intervenções educativasna limpeza e desinfecção de superfícies em uma unidade básica de saúde. Métodos: trata-se de um estudo prospectivo, analítico com abordagem quantitativa. O estudo foi realizado em uma unidade básica de saúde, onde atuam duas equipes da Estratégia de Saúde da Família. Optou-se por avaliar a limpeza e desinfecção das superfícies: carrinho de curativo, balcão da recepção, mesa ginecológica, maca do paciente e mesa de consulta de enfermagem, utilizando-se dos métodos de monitoramento: avaliação visual, contagem de unidades formadoras de colônias e mensuração de adenosina trifosfato. Utilizaram-se, para a análise estatística, o teste de postos de Wilcoxon e o teste de Mann-Whitney, considerou-se nível de significância de 5% ou (p<0,05). Resultados: obteve-se um total de 720 avaliações realizadas ao término de todas as fases. Observou-se na fase I uma taxa de reprovação de 57,5%, 20,0% e 90,0%; após a intervenção educativa, os quantitativos de reprovação em curto prazo diminuíram para 0,0%, 2,5,0% e 50,0% (dados da fase III) e, em longo prazo, para 5,0%, 0,0% e 65% (dados da fase IV) para os métodos visual, adenosina trifosfato e cultura, respectivamente. A inspeção visual foi o método que apresentou maior frequência de superfícies reprovadas nas fases I e IV. Conclusão: houve redução da carga microbiana e valores das leituras de adenosina trifosfato; embora essa redução não tenha sido estatisticamente significativa em todas as superfícies. Constatou-se que a intervenção educativa foi eficiente

Bibliografía

1. Han JH, Sullivan N, Leas BF, Pegues DA, Kaczmarek JL, Umscheid CA. Cleaning hospital room surfaces to prevent health care-associated infections. a technical brief. Ann Intern Med [Internet]. 2015 Oct [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 163(8):598-607. Available from: https://www. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4812669/pdf/ nihms-745848.pdf
2. Alfa MJ, Lo E, Olson N, MacRae M, Buelow-Smith L. Use of a daily disinfectant cleaner instead of a daily cleaner reduced hospital-acquired infection rates. Am J Infect Control [Internet]. 2015 Feb [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 43(2):141-6. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect. com/science/article/pii/S019665531401284X
3. Dancer SJ. Controlling hospital-acquired infection: focus on the role of the environment and new technologies for decontamination. Clin Microbiol Rev [Internet]. 2014 Oct [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 27(4):665-90. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ pmc/articles/PMC4187643/pdf/zcm665.pdf
4. Weber DJ, Anderson D, Rutala WA. The role of the surface environment in healthcare-associated infections. Curr Opin Infect Dis [Internet]. 2013 Aug [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 26(4):338-44. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23743816
5. Albrecht UV, von Jan U, Sedlacek L, Groos S, Suerbaum S, Vonberg RP. Standardized, Appbased disinfection of iPads in a clinical and nonclinical setting: comparative analysis. J Med Internet Res [Internet]. 2013 Aug [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 15(8):e176. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ pmc/articles/PMC3758047/
6. Havill NL. Best practices in disinfection of noncritical surfaces in the health care setting: creating a bundle for success. Am J Infect Control [Internet]. 2013 May [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 41(5 Suppl):S26-30. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0196655313000059
7. Dancer SJ. How do we assess hospital cleaning? A proposal for microbiological standards for surface hygiene in hospitals. J Hosp Infect [Internet]. 2004 Jan [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 56(1):10-5. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S0195670103003955
8. Boyce JM. Modern technologies for improving cleaning and disinfection of environmental surfaces in hospitals. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control [Internet]. 2016 Apr [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 5:10. Available from: https://aricjournal.biomedcentral.com/ articles/10.1186/s13756-016-0111-x
9. Dancer SJ, White L, Robertson C. Monitoring environmental cleanliness on two surgical wards. Int J Environ Health Res [Internet]. 2008 Oct [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 18(5):357-64. Available from: https://www. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18821374
10. Huang YS, Chen YC, Chen ML, Cheng A, Hung IC, Wang JT, et al. Comparing visual inspection, aerobic colony counts, and adenosine triphosphate bioluminescence assay for evaluating surface cleanliness at a medical center. Am J Infect Control [Internet]. 2015 Aug [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 43(8):882-6. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/pii/S0196655315002151
11. Link T, Kleiner C, Mancuso MP, Dziadkowiec O, Halverson-Carpenter K. Determining high touch areas in the operating room with levels of contamination. Am J Infect Control [Internet]. 2016 Nov [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 44(11):1350-5. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S0196655316002406
12. Andrade SMO de. A pesquisa científica em saúde: concepção e execução. 4ª ed. Campo Grande (MS): UNIDERP; 2011.
13. Goodman ER, Platt R, Bass R, Onderdonk AB, Yokoe DS, Huang SS. Impact of an environmental cleaning intervention on the presence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and vancomycin-resistant enterococci on surfaces in intensive care unit rooms. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol [Internet]. 2008 July [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 29(7):593-9. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/ PMC2670228/pdf/nihms94149.pdf
14. Knape L, Hambraeus A, Lytsy B. The adenosine triphosphate method as a quality control tool to assess ‘cleanliness’ of frequently touched hospital surfaces. J Hosp Infect [Internet]. 2015 Oct [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 91(2):166-70. Available from: http:// www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S0195670115002649
15. Frota OP, Ferreira AM, Koch R, de Andrade D, Rigotti MA, Borges NM, et al. Surface cleaning effectiveness in a walk-in emergency care unit: Influence of a multifaceted intervention. American Journal of Infection Control [Internet]. 2016 Aug [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 44(12):1572-7. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S0196655316306915
16. Ferreira AM, Andrade D de, Rigotti MA, Almeida MTG de, Guerra OG, Santos Junior AG dos. Assessment of disinfection of hospital surfaces using different monitoring methods. Rev Latino-Am Enfermagem [Internet]. 2015 May-Jun [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 23(3):466- 74. Available from: http://www.scielo.br/pdf/rlae/ v23n3/0104-1169-rlae-23-03-00466.pdf
17. Mulvey D, Redding P, Robertson C, Woodall C, Kingsmore P, Bedwell D, et al. Finding a benchmark for monitoring hospital cleanliness. J Hosp Infect [Internet]. 2011 Jan [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 77(1):25-30. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/pii/S0195670110003774
18. Carling P. Methods for assessing the adequacy of practice and improving room disinfection. Am J Infect Control [Internet]. 2013 May [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 41(5 Suppl):S20-5. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S0196655313000564
19. Cloutman-Green E, D’Arcy N, Spratt DA, Hartley JC, Klein N. How clean is clean - Is a new microbiology standard required? Am J Infect Control [Internet]. 2014 Sept [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 42(9):1002-3. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S0196655314007895
20. Boyce JM, Havill NL, Lipka A, Havill H, Rizvani R. Variations in Hospital Daily Cleaning Practices. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol [Internet]. 2010 Jan [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 31(1):99-101. Available from: https:// www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19951203
21. Boyce JM, Havill NL, Havill HL, Mangione E, Dumigan DG, Moore BA. Comparison of fluorescent marker systems with 2 quantitative methods of assessing terminal cleaning practices. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol [Internet]. 2011 Dec [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 32(12):1187-93. Available from: https://www. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22080657
22. Griffith CJ, Cooper RA, Gilmore J, Davies C, Lewis M. An evaluation of hospital cleaning regimes and standards. J Hosp Infect [Internet]. 2000 May [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 45(1):19-28. Available from: http://ac.els-cdn.com/S019567019990717X/1-s2.0- S019567019990717X-main.pdf?_tid=478dee76-e976- 11e6-96cb-00000aab0f6b&acdnat=1486060669_2125f b829d64aa92bb6e82c052076741
23. Lewis T, Griffith C, Gallo M, Weinbren M. A modified ATP benchmark for evaluating the cleaning of some hospital environmental surfaces. J Hosp Infect [Internet]. 2008 Jun [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 69(2):156-63. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/pii/S0195670108001278
24. Malik RE, Cooper RA, Griffith CJ. Use of audit tools to evaluate the efficacy of cleaning systems in hospitals. Am J Infect Control [Internet]. 2003 [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 31(3):181-7. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S019665530248234X?via%3Dihub
25. Sherlock O, O’Connell N, Creamer E, Humphreys H. Is it really clean? An evaluation of the efficacy of four methods for determining hospital cleanliness. J Hosp Infect [Internet]. 2009 [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 72(2):140-6. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/pii/S0195670109000838
26. Rede Brasileira de Enfermagem e Segurança do Paciente. Estratégias para a segurança do paciente: manual para profissionais da saúde. Porto Alegre (RS): EDIPUCRS; 2013.
27. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion. Guide to infection prevention in outpatient settings: Minimum Expectations for safe care. Atlanta (US): CDC; 2011.
28. Ferreira H. Utilização do método ATP bioluminescência na avaliação da eficácia da limpeza e desinfeção de superfícies em cuidados de saúde primários. Hotelaria & Saúde [Internet]. 2014 Jan-Jun [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 5:25-7. Available from: http://www. hotelariaesaude.pt/scid/webHS/includes/book/ viewBook.asp?articleID=84
29. Dumigan DG, Boyce JM, Havill NL, Golebiewski M, Balogun O, Rizvani R. Who is really caring for your environment of care? Developing standardized cleaning procedures and effective monitoring techniques. Am J Infect Control [Internet]. 2010 June [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 38(5):387-92. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S0196655309008293
30. Branch-Elliman W, Robillard E, McCarthy G Jr, Gupta K. Direct feedback with the ATP luminometer as a process improvement tool for terminal cleaning of patient rooms. Am J Infect Control [Internet]. 2014 Feb [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 42(2):195-7. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S0196655313012121
31. Watanabe R, Shimoda T, Yano R, Hayashi Y, Nakamura S, Matsuo J, et al. Visualization of hospital cleanliness in three Japanese hospitals with a tendency toward long-term care. BMC Res Notes [Internet]. 2014 Mar [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 7:121. Available from: https:// www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3996023/ pdf/1756-0500-7-121.pdf
32. Luick L, Thompson PA, Loock MH, Vetter SL, Cook J, Guerrero DM. Diagnostic assessment of different environmental cleaning monitoring methods. Am J Infect Control [Internet]. 2013 Aug [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 41(8):751-2. Available from: http:// www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S0196655312012679.
33. Chan MC, Lin TY, Chiu YH, Huang TF, Chiu SK, Liu TL, et al. Applying ATP bioluminescence to design and evaluate a successful new intensive care unit cleaning programme. J Hosp Infect [Internet]. 2015 Aug [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 90(4):344-6. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S0195670115001802
34. Moore G, Smyth D, Singleton J, Wilson P. The use of adenosine triphosphate bioluminescence to assess the efficacy of a modified cleaning program implemented within an intensive care setting. Am J Infect Control [Internet]. 2010 Oct [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 38(8):617-22. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/pii/S0196655310004463
35. Rigotti MA, Ferreira AM, Nogueira MCL, Almeida MTG , Guerra OG, Andrade D. Evaluation of three surface friction techniques for the removal of organic matter. Texto Contexto Enferm [Internet]. 2015 Dec [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 24(4):1061-70. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0104- 0707201500003690014
36. Sattar SA, Maillard JY. The crucial role of wiping in decontamination of high-touch environmental surfaces: review of current status and directions for the future. Am J Infect Control [Internet]. 2013 May [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 41(5 Suppl):S97-104. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ article/pii/S0196655313000151
37. Cooper RA, Griffith CJ, Malik RE, Obee P, Looker N. Monitoring the effectiveness of cleaning in four British hospitals. Am J Infect Control [Internet]. 2007 Jun [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 35(5):338-41. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S0196655306011801
38. Gibbs SG, Sayles H, Chaika O, Hewlett A, Colbert EM, Smith PW. Evaluation of the relationship between ATP bioluminescence assay and the presence of organisms associated with healthcare-associated infections. Healthcare Infection [Internet]. 2014 Sept [cited 2017 Jan 20]; 19(3):101-7. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S1835561716300370

Avaliação da eficiência da limpeza e desinfecção de superfícies em uma unidade básica de saúde

Efficiency evaluation of the cleaning and disinfection of surfaces in a primary health center

Evaluación de la eficiencia de la limpieza y desinfección de superficies en una unidad básica de salud

Resumen

Abstract

Resumo

Bibliografía