TED Conversations

This conversation is closed.

Use of germicidal ultraviolet light to instantly, chealply, and efficacious disinfect hands of nurses, doctors and consumers world-wide

Proper Hand Hygiene practice is acknowledged as the key means, the cornerstone, to prevent hospital acquired infections and to protect consumers world-wide from infectious bacteria, virus, and spore. However, current hand hygiene technology cannot effectively deal with the widespread environmental contamination throughout hospitals, particularly on compromised soft and hard surfaces within patient rooms and intensive care units, as well in food prep areas, offices, airports, schools, and starbucks!Even when used as instructed, the most utilized current approach, alcohol based hand rubs (AHRB) technology, have well documented microbiology limitations
AHBR have limited ability to sanitize and fall considerably short of the nominal sanitation goal of 99.99 % inactivation, (-4 Log10 ) unless used vigilantly for 30 seconds with full coverage of the both bare hands.
ABHR demonstrate some effectiveness on vegetated bacteria
ABHR much less efficacious on virus and are completely ineffective on bacterial endospores such as C. difficile
ABHR are not effective at all on standard exam or surgical gloves, which also get compromised during patient care, emergency room care, in the OR, and in food service areas
When used as recommended by the CDC, disinfection once on the way into a room and once again on the way out of the room, there are well documented AHRB user limitations such as taking too much time and causing too much skin irritation over the course of an 8 hour shift
In addition, the CDC mode does no account for recontamination of hands during patient care so any benefit of hand disinfection is quickly lost
The WHO mode, which recommends multiple hand disinfections during the course of patient care, results in more benefits but exacerbates the limitations of AHBR even more
ABHTR are expensive on a per dose basis (>$0.07). The CDC mode costs USA hospitals close to $3 Billion per year in consumable supplies. The WHO mode would result in even more scosts to h


Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Sep 11 2013: The problem with UV light is:
    1. It is light. You can't shine UV light into every nook and cranny of any object. Infectious agents can hide under those areas shielded by light.
    2. It is detrimental to certain plastics: UV light can weaken some plastics used in hospitals. Unfortunately plastic materials are very common in health care facilities. You might inadvertently destroy a piece of plastic that works to plug up something infectious from getting out.

    UV light has its uses... but with a wide limitations.
    • Sep 11 2013: Hi Jeff,

      Bingo. The current fad of applying UVC to room surface disinfection iafter a pateint is discharged s full of gaps and limitations. some of which you point out. There are many more. The marketeers of such systems are proferred band aids and fixes, but the whole premise is flawed. The key is to provide ongoing disinfeciotn of key touch surface DURING room occupancy. These will be explore more during the upcoming IUVA workshop and panel discusssion. One possible intervention duirng patient occupancy is
      the cornerstone of global infeciton prevention - proper hand disinfeciton. Since all surfaces are contaminated
      and the hands are the conveyor belt to transfer the pathogens from those surfaces to the susceptible patient.
      Current practice, even when done per instructions on the labels, and with the vigilance of the WHO recommendatrions falls well short of proper practice. UVC has the potential to fix this and has been shown to safely, efficacious, and less expensively enable Proper hand disinfection.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.