Efficacy of aerosolized hydrogen peroxide (Deprox) cleaning compared to physical cleaning in a Burns Unit

Abstract

Background: The performance of Deprox aerosolized hydrogen peroxide (aHP) has not been extensively studied in real-world clinical settings. A comparative study of aHP terminal disinfection was conducted in a Burns Unit and its performance compared to physical cleaning alone.

Methods: Environmental surfaces were sampled pre-cleaning, post-cleaning and post-aHP disinfection. Samples were cultured for MRSA, VRE, Gram-negative multi-resistant organisms and other Gram-negative bacilli.

Results: 310 sites were sampled. There was a reduction in the rates of contaminated surfaces post-aHP, though pathogens were still recoverable in most cases, except for VRE. There was a marked reduction in MRSA contamination of soft surfaces (12% post-clean vs 6% post-aHP), and patient room surfaces (8.3% post-clean vs 2.8% post-aHP). It does not work as well for MRSA in bathrooms: 7% of surfaces were positive post-clean, and 9% post-aHP. There was a reduction in multiresistant Gram-negative bacteria (7%-3%), mostly due to drains (33%-13%).

Conclusion: aHP is a useful method of environmental disinfection, especially for Gram-negative pathogens in drains and MRSA on hard and soft surfaces. Where ongoing acquisition of MRSA is a problem, an adjunctive method of terminal disinfection in bathrooms could be considered.

Keywords: Aerosolized hydrogen peroxide; Deprox; Environmental cleaning; Environmental contamination.