Advertisement

Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing

, Volume 18, Issue 1, pp 7–12 | Cite as

Computer Keyboard and Mouse as a Reservoir of Pathogens in an Intensive Care Unit

  • Bernd Hartmann
  • Matthias Benson
  • Axel Junger
  • Lorenzo Quinzio
  • Rainer Röhrig
  • Bernhard Fengler
  • Udo W. Färber
  • Burkhard Wille
  • Gunter Hempelmann
Article

Abstract

Objective. User interfaces of patient data management systems (PDMS) in intensive care units (ICU), like computer keyboard and mouse, may serve as reservoirs for the transmission of microorganisms. Pathogens may be transferred via the hands of personnel to the patient causing nosocomial infections. The purpose of this study was to examine the microbial contamination of computer user interfaces with potentially pathogenic microorganisms, compared with other fomites in a surgical intensive care unit of a tertiary teaching hospital. Methods.Sterile swab samples were received from patient's bedside computer keyboard and mouse, and three other sites (infusion pumps, ventilator, ward round trolley) in the patient's room in a 14 bed surgical intensive care unit at a university hospital. At the central ward samples from keyboard and mouse of the physician's workstation, and control buttons of the ward's intercom and telephone receiver were obtained. Quantitative and qualitative bacteriological sampling occurred during two periods of three months each on eight nonconsecutive days. Results.In all 14 patients' rooms we collected a total of 1118 samples: 222 samples from keyboards and mice, 214 from infusion pumps and 174 from the ward's trolley. From the central ward 16 samples per fomites were obtained (computer keyboard and mouse at the physician's workstation and the ward's intercom and telephone receiver). Microbacterial analysis from samples in patients' rooms yielded 26 contaminated samples from keyboard and mouse (5.9%) compared with 18 positive results from other fomites within patients' rooms (3.0%; p< 0.02). At the physician's computer terminal two samples obtained from the mouse (6.3%) showed positive microbial testing whereas the ward's intercom and telephone receiver were not contaminated (p= 0.15). Conclusions.The colonization rate for computer keyboard and mouse of a PDMS with potentially pathogenic microorganisms is greater than that of other user interfaces in a surgical ICU. These fomites may be additional reservoirs for the transmision of microorganisms and become vectors for cross-transmission of nosocomial infections in the ICU setting.

Computers hygiene nosocomial infection intensive care unit 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.
    Jarvis WR. Selected aspects of the socioeconomic impact of nosocomial infections:Morbidity, mortality, cost, and prevention. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1996; 17: 552-557Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pittet D, Dharan S, Touveneau S, Sauvan V, Perneger TV. Bacterial contamination of the hands of hospital staff during routine patient care. Arch Intern Med 1999; 159: 821-826Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Neely AN, Maley MP, Warden GD. Computer keyboards as reservoirs for acinetobacter baumannii in a burn hospital. Clin Infect Dis 1999; 29: 1358-1360Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Neely AN, Sittig DF. Basic microbiologic and infection control information to reduce the potential transmission of pathogens to patients via computer hardware. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2002; 9: 500-508Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bures S, Fishbain JT, Uyehara CF, Parker JM, Berg BW. Computer keyboards and faucet handles as reservoirs of nosocomial pathogens in the intensive care unit. Am J Infect Control 2000; 28: 465-471Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dharan S, Mourouga P, Copin P, Bessmer G, Tschanz B, Pittet D. Routine disinfection of patients' environmental surfaces. Myth or reality? J Hosp Infect 1999; 42: 113-117Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Neely AN, Maley MP. Dealing with contaminated computer keyboards and microbial survival. Am J Infect Control 2001; 29: 131-132Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Devine J, Cooke RP, Wright EP. Is methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) contamination of ward-based computer terminals a surrogate marker for nosocomial MRSA transmission and handwashing compliance? J Hosp Infect 2001; 48: 72-75Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pittet D. Improving compliance with hand hygiene in hospitals. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2000; 21: 381-386Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hugonnet S, Pittet D. Hand hygiene-beliefs or science? Clin Microbiol Infect 2000; 6: 350-356Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hugonnet S, Pittet D. Hand hygiene revisited: Lessons from the past and present. Curr Infect Dis Rep 2000; 2: 484-489Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bernd Hartmann
    • 1
  • Matthias Benson
    • 1
  • Axel Junger
    • 1
  • Lorenzo Quinzio
    • 1
  • Rainer Röhrig
    • 1
  • Bernhard Fengler
    • 1
  • Udo W. Färber
    • 2
  • Burkhard Wille
    • 1
  • Gunter Hempelmann
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care Medicine, and Pain TherapyUniversity HospitalGiessen
  2. 2.Institute for Hospital Hygiene and Infection-ControlGiessen

Personalised recommendations