Advertisement

Journal of Industrial Microbiology

, Volume 4, Issue 2, pp 145–154 | Cite as

Comparative testing and evaluation of hard-surface disinfectants

  • Ralph S. Tanner
Original Papers

Summary

The activity of eleven disinfectants againstStaphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, andSaccharomyces cerevisiae was determined using a method based on the A.O.A.C. germicidal and detergent sanitizer assay. Based on the activity against the test organisms after 30-and 60-s exposures to each disinfectant, the disinfectant containing chlorine dioxide had the highest biocidal activity in this assay, on a mg/l basis. In addition, a disinfectant containing sodium hypochlorite and a disinfectant containing sodium chlorite performed well, at concentrations below label specifications. The results illustrate the importance of testing disinfectants in the context of their intended use.

Key words

Disinfectant Hypochlorite Chlorine dioxide Iodine Hydrogen peroxide Glutaraldehyde Quaternary ammonium compound Phenol 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Ascenzi, J.M., R.J. Ezzell and T.M. Wendt. 1987. A more accurate method for measurement of tuberculocidal activity of disinfectants. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 53: 2189–2192.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 1980. Disinfectants. In: Official Methods of Analysis, 13th ed. (Horowitz, W., ed.), pp. 56–68, Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Centers for Disease Control. 1984. Salmonellosis associated with cheese consumption—Canada. MMWR 33: 387.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Centers for Disease Control. 1985 Update: Milk-borne salmonellosis—Illinois. MMWR 34: 215–216.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Centers for Disease Control. 1985. Listeriosis outbreak associated with Mexican-style cheese—California. MMWR 34: 357–359.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dwire, K.M. and J.F. James. 1982. Comparative testing and evaluation of germicidal solutions used for the sterilization or disinfection of medical and dental instruments and equipment. ADM Lab. J. 12: 1–8.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dychdala, G.R. 1983. Chlorine and chlorine compounds. In: Disinfection, Sterilization and Preservation, 3rd ed. (Block, S.S., ed.), pp. 157–182. Lea & Febiger, Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Favero, M.S. 1983. Chemical disinfection of medical and surgical materials. In: Disinfection, Sterilization and Preservation, 3rd ed. (Block, S.S., ed.), pp. 469–492, Lea & Febiger, Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fleming, D.W., S.L. Cochi, K.L. MacDonald, J. Brondum, P.S. Hayes, B.D. Plikaytis, M.B. Holmes, A. Audurier, C.V. Broome and A.L. Reingold. 1985. Pasteurized milk as a vehicle of infection in an outbreak of listeriosis. N. Engl. J. Med. 312: 404–407.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Geldreich, E.E. 1986. Potable water: new direction in microbial regulations. ASM News 52: 530–534.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gottardi, W. 1983. Iodine and iodine compounds. In: Disinfection, Sterilization and Preservation, 3rd ed. (Block S.S., ed.), pp. 183–196. Lea & Febiger, Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jones, R. 1987. Sanitizing your water system: a critical step in your process. Microfiltration News (Gelman Sciences) 7: 4.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Meyers, T. 1988. Failing the test: germicides or use dilution methodology? ASM News 54: 19–21.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Morton, H.E. 1983.Pseudomonas. In: Disinfection, Sterilization and Preservation 3rd ed. (Block, S.S., ed), pp. 401–413, Lea & Febiger, Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Petrocci, A.N. 1983. Surface-active agents: quaternary ammonium compounds. In: Disinfection, Sterilization and Preservation, 3rd ed. (Block, S.S., ed.), pp. 309–329, Lea & Febiger, Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Prindle, R.F. 1983. Phenolic compounds. In: Disinfection, Sterilization and Preservation, 3rd ed. (Block, S.S., ed.), pp. 197–224, Lea & Febiger, Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Reybrouck, G. 1980. A comparison of the quantitative suspension tests for the assessment of disinfectants. Zent. bl. Bakteriol. Hyg. Abt. 1 Orig. B 170: 449–456.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Robison, R.A., H.L. Bodily, D.F. Robinson and R.P. Christensen. 1988. A suspension method to determine reuse life of chemical disinfectants during clinical use. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 54: 158–164.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Russell, A.D. 1983. Principles of antimicrobial activity. In: Disinfection, Sterilization and Preservation, 3rd ed. (Block, S.S., ed.), pp. 717–750, Lea & Febiger, Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Scott, E.M. and S.P. Gorman. 1983. Sterilization with glutaraldehyde. In: Disinfection, Sterilization and Preservation, 3rd ed. (Block, S.S., ed.), pp. 65–88, Lea & Febiger, Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Turner, F.J. 1983. Hydrogen peroxide and other oxidant disinfectants. In: Disinfection, Sterilization and Preservation, 3rd ed. (Block, S.S., ed.), pp. 240–250, Lea & Febiger, Philadelphia PA.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wolin, E.A., M.J. Wolin and R.S. Wolfe. 1963. Formation of methane by bacterial extracts. J. Biol. Chem. 238: 2882–2886.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Industrial Microbiology 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ralph S. Tanner
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Botany and MicrobiologyUniversity of OklahomaNormanU. S. A.

Personalised recommendations