Clinical Data on Hospital Environmental Hygiene Monitoring and Medical Staff Protection during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Outbreak

1. Introduction

The outbreak of COVID-19 in Wuhan in December 2019 has led to a serious public health event ^[1-3]. Meanwhile, the outbreak of this novel virus has placed unprecedented challenges on hospital environmental hygiene. The occurrence of medical staff-associated infections is closely related to long-lived pathogens in the hospital environment ^[4,5]. Thus, it is crucial to assess hospital environmental hygiene to understand the most important environmental issues for controlling the spread of COVID-19 in hospitals. The Chinese government quickly adopted quarantine measures for confirmed and suspected patients to restrain the spread of the pandemic^[6]. Comprehensive monitoring of hospital environmental hygiene during the outbreak of the pandemic is conducive to the refinement of hospital infection control ^[5,7]. It also increases understanding of the environmental challenges corresponding to the reemergence of COVID-19 or similar viruses. Therefore, it is of great significance to ensure the safety of medical treatment and the quality of hospital infection control through the monitoring of environmental hygiene. According to a report from the China Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, as of February 11, 3019 medical staff members were infected with the new coronavirus (including confirmed cases, suspected cases, clinically diagnosed cases, and asymptomatic infections, of which 1716 were confirmed cases), indicating that infection through no occupational exposure may occur ^[8], but more evidence is needed to support this hypothesis. Meanwhile, it is extremely important to ensure the safety of medical treatments and the quality of hospital infection control by monitoring hospital environmental hygiene. However, sensitive and effective methods for monitoring hospital-acquired infection control are still limited. Here, by monitoring COVID-19 and detecting nucleic acid, we reveal clinical data indicating hospital environmental hygiene levels and provide a way to monitor pathogenic microorganism contamination and nosocomial infections.

2. Methods

3. Results

A total of 158 samples were collected from the area at risk of contamination. The two positive areas were the surfaces of the nurse station in the isolation area with suspected patients and the air of the isolation ward with an intensive care patient (Tables 2 and 3). We found that the virus was present both on surfaces and in the air. The total positive rate was 1.26% (2/158). The positive rates of the air and surface samples were 3.57% (1/28) and 0.77% (1/130), respectively.

Based on the original 24 hours of ultraviolet air filtering and 1000-2000 mg/L chlorine-containing disinfectant for ambient air and floor disinfection, the frequencies and duration times of air disinfections were extended. Key surfaces such as computer keyboards that were easily overlooked were clearly noted and carefully disinfected. The samples from the positive area and indoor air were collected 24 hours later, and the test results were negative.

4. Discussion

Our positive results in nucleic acid tests indicated that viruses were present in the air of an isolation ward with intensive care patients. The hermetic spaces of isolation wards are weak in air flow, which may cause high contact with the virus. Additionally, the confirmed patient underwent tracheal intubation the day before the samples were collected, and this procedure produced large amounts of aerosols that spread in the wards and seriously polluted the air. Siegel et al. reported that medical ventilators might generate respiratory aerosols that have been associated with an increased risk of occupationally acquired infections among healthcare personnel ^[12]. Therefore, it is necessary to increase the intensity of disinfection for isolation wards with intensive care patients. For example, we should enhance ventilator exhaust management by adding ventilator exhaust port filters.

The suspected and confirmed patients stay a relatively long time in the high-risk area and may influence the environment. The intrusive and other operations that can easily produce aerosols may cause serious air pollution. The sites under observation without patients and operations have less impact on the environment. The samples from the same collection points were tested after a series of infection prevention and control measures were taken, such as continuous use of an air disinfection machine for the disinfection of ward air; extending the frequency of disinfection for ground and object surfaces; changing gloves and cleaning hands after operations and leaving the ward; and covering computer keyboards and changing the cover each day. Following the implementation of these measures, the results were negative, showing the effectiveness of disinfection. In the high-risk areas, such as hospital pre-check triages and the fever clinic, due to the open environment and large amount of air flow, the results were negative.

The previous research reports that the routine cleaning and disinfection procedures are the most likely cause of the deficiency of disinfection in the hospital environment, leading to the spread of pathogens ^[13]. In our study, viruses were detected on the surfaces of the nurse station in the isolation area with suspected patients, suggesting that we need to strengthen the surface disinfection of nurse stations, especially focusing on computer keyboards, mice and types of equipment that are not easy to disinfect. A large number of studies have shown that the hands or gloves of medical staff members may be contaminated by contact with environmental surfaces contaminated by pathogens^[13-15]. In the process of diagnosis and treatment, pathogens may be transmitted to patients and cause hospital-associated infections. Therefore, it is also very important to further strengthen the hand hygiene of the medical staff. We need to formulate refinement measures based on environmental hygiene monitoring data to improve the quality of hospital infection control. Due to fact that “uncultivable” microbes widely exist, traditional methods used to measure the effect of hospital infection control, such as sedimentation (exposing a microbial growth plate to the environment) have shown limited effects and poor sensitivity. For laboratories and testing organizations, high concentrations of nucleic acid may exist in aerosols, which may influence the test results and the operator’s safety and may even cause spread of the disease. Nucleic acid detection provides an effective method with which to monitor the environment and to evaluate the effectiveness of disinfection, especially for highly contagious diseases or pathogenic microorganisms with a potential aerosol risk, such as COVID-19. These nucleic acid detection results are very important for standardized hospital infection control. This study also increases our understanding of the environmental challenges corresponding to the reemergence of COVID-19 or similar viruses.

The data obtained in this study suggest that COVID-19 exists in the air of isolation wards with intensive care patients and existed on the surfaces of nurse stations and that medical staff encounter this virus in the air and on surfaces during patient care activities. An effective disinfection procedure may reduce the biosafety risk.

For hospital infection control, we suggest:

1. Different people should be responsible for the isolation observation area and the isolation ward area; crossing the areas should be strictly prohibited.

2. Objects in each area should be used exclusively; equipment that must be used for special purposes should be sterilized before being used in other areas.

3. Hand hygiene rules should be observed strictly, thoroughly and at all times.

4. Additional gloves, disposable isolators, protective screens or hoods should be worn when an operation may cause the spattering of blood, bodily fluid or aerosol, and these items should be discarded immediately to avoid the pollution of other areas.

Disclosure Statement

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.