4.5 Article

Air dispersed essential oils combined with standard sanitization procedures for environmental microbiota control in nosocomial hospitalization rooms

期刊

COMPLEMENTARY THERAPIES IN MEDICINE
卷 25, 期 -, 页码 113-119

出版社

CHURCHILL LIVINGSTONE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ctim.2016.02.004

关键词

Essential oils; Antimicrobial; Disinfection; Hospital; Environmental

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Environmental bacterial contaminant microorganisms are an ongoing problem in hospitals. Essential oil vapours (EO) may help reducing this type of contamination. Aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of nebulized selected essential oils (EO) in reducing the microbial contamination in residential health care house rooms. Design: The study was carried out in a two-story 112-bed tertiary care structure (approximately 1060 m(2)). Contamination in rooms and corridors was monitored for a total of n = 5 months, including a starting baseline sampling and one end-study point, and without combined treatment (standard sanitization alone). Contact slides were collected for microbiological analysis. Results: Reductions in both bacterial and fungal contamination were observed between rooms cleaned using standard sanitization alone or in combination with essential oils nebulization (average 90% decrease for total count, P<0.01; 90% for yeasts and molds, P<0.05). Decreases of antibiotic (70%), mucolytic (100%), bronchodilators (100%), and steroidal (67%) and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (33%) prescriptions were observed, with no adverse effects on patients. Conclusions: The selected EO composition is effective in reducing both the environmental microbial contamination and pharmaceutical drugs consumption in a nosocomial health care house. This study demonstrates that aerial EO diffusion combined with standard sanitization procedures, has great potential to reduce the microbial contamination in critical hospital environments such as hospitalization rooms. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据