A comparison of air sampling methods for Clostridium difficile endospore aerosol

被引:0
|
作者
Casey W. Cooper
Kathleen A. N. Aithinne
Evan L. Floyd
Bradley S. Stevenson
David L. Johnson
机构
[1] University of Oklahoma College of Public Health,Department of Occupational and Environmental Health
[2] University of Oklahoma,Department of Microbiology and Plant Biology
来源
Aerobiologia | 2019年 / 35卷
关键词
Air sampling; Aerosol; Airborne dissemination; Filter; Impinger;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The airborne dissemination of Clostridium difficile (C. difficile) endospores (spores) in healthcare environments is documented in multiple studies. Once airborne, spores have the potential for transport on air currents to other areas. This study compared the methods in the collection of C. difficile spore aerosol. This study determined the relative efficiency of commonly used bioaerosol air sampling methods when characterizing airborne C. difficile spore concentrations. Air samplers evaluated in this study were the AirTrace slit-to-agar impactor, AGI-30 impinger, SKC BioSampler impinger, and a 47-mm mixed cellulose ester (MCE) filter cassette. Non-toxigenic C. difficile spores were nebulized into an enclosure contained in a biological safety cabinet. Side-by-side air samples were drawn from the enclosure. The slit-to-agar impactor, successfully used in previous studies to collect airborne spores, served as the reference method. Relative efficiency for the 47-mm MCE filter cartridge was higher than the slit-to-agar impactor (mean 136.6%, 95% CI 124.7–148.5%). Efficiencies of the impingers were similar and were low (mean 4.13%, 95% CI 2.27–5.99%). Impingers failed to maintain culturability of C. difficile spores during sampling. This study is the first to compare the efficiencies of commonly used bioaerosol sampling methods to collect airborne C. difficile spores. Filter air sampling provided the greatest collection of airborne spores. Slit-to-agar air sampling may underestimate the number of airborne spores present. Impinger air sampling could significantly underestimate the actual number of airborne C. difficile spores present or fail to detect airborne spores.
引用
收藏
页码:411 / 420
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Challenges for Standardization of Clostridium difficile Typing Methods
    Huber, Charlotte A.
    Foster, Niki F.
    Riley, Thomas V.
    Paterson, David L.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY, 2013, 51 (09) : 2810 - 2814
  • [22] COMPARISON OF SAMPLING METHODS FOR CARBONACEOUS AEROSOLS IN AMBIENT AIR
    HERING, SV
    APPEL, BR
    CHENG, W
    SALAYMEH, F
    CADLE, SH
    MULAWA, PA
    CAHILL, TA
    ELDRED, RA
    SUROVIK, M
    FITZ, D
    HOWES, JE
    KNAPP, KT
    STOCKBURGER, L
    TURPIN, BJ
    HUNTZICKER, JJ
    ZHANG, XQ
    MCMURRY, PH
    AEROSOL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 1990, 12 (01) : 200 - 213
  • [23] Molecular methods for detecting and typing of Clostridium difficile
    Collins, Deirdre A.
    Elliott, Briony
    Riley, Thomas V.
    PATHOLOGY, 2015, 47 (03) : 211 - 218
  • [24] A multi-laboratory comparison of two molecular methods for the detection of toxigenic Clostridium difficile
    Halstead, Diane C.
    Abid, Joan
    Sloan, Lynne
    Meza, Diana
    Ramsey-Walker, Daphne
    Hata, D. Jane
    JOURNAL OF INFECTION IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES, 2016, 10 (01): : 62 - 67
  • [25] Comparison of agar dilution and broth microdilution methods for Clostridium difficile antimicrobial susceptibility testing
    Igawa, Gene
    Casey, Mika
    Sawabe, Etsuko
    Nukui, Yoko
    Okugawa, Shu
    Moriya, Kyoji
    Koike, Ryuji
    Tohda, Shuji
    Saito, Ryoichi
    JOURNAL OF GLOBAL ANTIMICROBIAL RESISTANCE, 2016, 7 : 43 - 45
  • [26] A comparison of Clostridium difficile diagnostic methods for identification of local strains in a South African centre
    Rajabally, Naayil
    Kullin, Brian
    Ebrahim, Kaleemuddeen
    Brock, Tunehafo
    Weintraub, Andrej
    Whitelaw, Andrew
    Bamford, Colleen
    Watermeyer, Gillian
    Thomson, Sandie
    Abratt, Valerie
    Reid, Sharon
    JOURNAL OF MEDICAL MICROBIOLOGY, 2016, 65 : 320 - 327
  • [27] Characterizing background aerosol in an air mass: a comparison of three methods
    Littfin, Kathleen
    Gathman, Stuart
    Journal of Aerosol Science, 1999, 30 (Suppl. 1)
  • [28] COMPARISON OF 2 TOXINS PRODUCED BY CLOSTRIDIUM DIFFICILE
    TAYLOR, NS
    THORNE, GM
    BARTLETT, JG
    INFECTION AND IMMUNITY, 1981, 34 (03) : 1036 - 1043
  • [29] Comparison of Supplemented Brucella Agar and Modified Clostridium difficile Agar for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing of Clostridium difficile
    Kim, Gye Hyeong
    Kim, Jieun
    Pai, Hyunjoo
    Kang, Jung Oak
    ANNALS OF LABORATORY MEDICINE, 2014, 34 (06) : 439 - 445
  • [30] Air sampling of aerosol and gaseous pesticides
    Amin, M.K.
    Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers, 1999, 42 (03): : 593 - 600