Environmental effectiveness of pulsed-xenon light in the operating room

Sarah Simmons, MPH DrPH, Charles Dale Jr., BA, James Holt, MS, Deborah G. Passey, PhD'Correspondence information about the author PhD Deborah G. PasseyEmail the author PhD Deborah G. Passey, Mark Stibich, PhD

In past years, Xenex has conducted many trials, especially in ORs, for hospitals desiring to demonstrate for themselves how pulsed xenon can zap those germs in ORs! Each hospital also shared their data. Our team pooled and analyzed it.

They found that over the 23 hospitals and almost 1500 samples, LightStrike Robots reduced OR contamination by 86% after manual cleaning.

Abstract
Background

Manual cleaning and disinfection of the operating room (OR) environment may be inadequate due to human error. No-touch technologies, such as pulsed-xenon ultraviolet light (PX-UV), can be used as an adjunct to manual cleaning processes to reduce surface contamination in the OR. This article reports the cumulative results from 23 hospitals across the United States that performed microbiologic validation of PX-UV disinfection after manual cleaning.

Methods

We obtained samples from 732 high-touch surfaces in 136 ORs at 23 hospitals, after manual terminal cleaning, and again after PX-UV disinfection (n = 1464 surface samples). Samples were enumerated after incubation, and the results are reported as total colony-forming units (CFU).

Results

The average CFU after manual cleaning ranged from 5.8 to 34.37, and after PX-UV, from 0.69 to 6.43. With manual cleaning alone, 67% of surfaces were still positive for CFUs; after PX-UV disinfection, that number decreased to 38% of all sampled surfaces—a 44% reduction. When comparing manual cleaning to PX-UV, the reduction in CFU count was statistically significant.

Conclusion

When used after the manual cleaning process, the PX-UV device significantly reduced contamination on high-touch surfaces in the OR.

Read the Full Study

Credit Rachael Sparks