Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 May 22;10(1):81.
doi: 10.1186/s13756-021-00948-1.

The impact of a 'milking the COW' campaign in a regional hospital in Singapore

Affiliations

The impact of a 'milking the COW' campaign in a regional hospital in Singapore

Surinder Kaur M S Pada et al. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. .

Abstract

Background: Computerisation of various processes in hospitals and reliance on electronic devices raises the concern of contamination of these devices from the patient environment. We undertook this study to determine if an attached hand hygiene device that unlocks the screen of a computer on wheels (COW) on usage can be effective in decreasing the microbiological burden on computer keyboards.

Methods: An electronic hand sanitizer was integrated onto the COW. A prospective cohort study with a crossover design involving 2 control and 2 intervention wards was used. The study end point was the number of colony forming units found on the keyboards. Bacteria were classified into 4 main groups; pathogenic, skin flora, from the environment or those thought to be commensals in healthy individuals. We then used a mixed effects model for the statistical analysis to determine if there were any differences before and after the intervention.

Results: Thirty-nine keyboards were swabbed at baseline, day 7 and 14, with 234 keyboards cultured, colony forming units (CFUs) counted and organisms isolated. By mixed model analysis, the difference of mean bacteria count between intervention and control for week 1 was 32.74 (- 32.74, CI - 94.29 to 28.75, p = 0.29), for week 2 by 155.86 (- 155.86, CI - 227.45 to - 83.53, p < 0.0001), and after the 2-week period by 157.04 (- 157.04, CI - 231.53 to - 82.67, p < 0.0001). In the sub-analysis, there were significant differences of pathogenic bacteria counts for the Intervention as compared to the Control in contrast with commensal counts.

Conclusion: A hand hygiene device attached to a COW may be effective in decreasing the microbiological burden on computer keyboards.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Set up of the COW with the hand hygiene devise attached
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Results of survey on use of device

References

    1. Rutala WA, White MS, Gergen MF, Weber DJ. Bacterial contamination of keyboards: efficacy and functional impact of disinfectants. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2006;27:372–377. doi: 10.1086/503340. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Messina G, Ceriale E, Lenzi D, Burgassi S, Azzolini E, Manzi P. Environmental contaminants in hospital settings and progress in disinfecting techniques. BioMed Res Int. 2013 doi: 10.1155/2013/429780. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lu PL, Siu LK, Chen TC, et al. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Acinetobacter baumannii on computer interface surfaces of hospital wards and association with clinical isolates. BMC Infect Dis. 2009;9:164. doi: 10.1186/1471-2334-9-164. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Moore G, Muzslay M, Wilson PR. The type, level, and distribution of microorganisms within the ward environment: a zonal analysis of an intensive care unit and a gastrointestinal surgical ward. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2013;34(5):500–506. doi: 10.1086/670219. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hartmann B, Benson M, Junger A, et al. Computer keyboard and mouse as a reservoir of pathogens in an intensive care unit. J Clin Monit. 2004;18:7–12. doi: 10.1023/B:JOCM.0000025279.27084.39. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types