Journal
ANTIBIOTICS-BASEL
Volume 10, Issue 9, Pages -Publisher
MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/antibiotics10091069
Keywords
antimicrobial materials; antimicrobial testing; 22196; antimicrobial surfaces; antibacterial coatings
Categories
Funding
- International Biodeterioration Research Group (IBRG), Manchester Metropolitan University
- COST Action AMiCI (European Cooperation in Science and Technology) [CA15114]
Ask authors/readers for more resources
This review provides a critical analysis of standardized methodology used in academia and industry, and demonstrates how many key methodological choices may impact efficacy assessment, highlighting the need to carefully consider intended antimicrobial end-use of any product.
Materials that confer antimicrobial activity, be that by innate property, leaching of biocides or design features (e.g., non-adhesive materials) continue to gain popularity to combat the increasing and varied threats from microorganisms, e.g., replacing inert surfaces in hospitals with copper. To understand how efficacious these materials are at controlling microorganisms, data is usually collected via a standardised test method. However, standardised test methods vary, and often the characteristics and methodological choices can make it difficult to infer that any perceived antimicrobial activity demonstrated in the laboratory can be confidently assumed to an end-use setting. This review provides a critical analysis of standardised methodology used in academia and industry, and demonstrates how many key methodological choices (e.g., temperature, humidity/moisture, airflow, surface topography) may impact efficacy assessment, highlighting the need to carefully consider intended antimicrobial end-use of any product.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available