Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Research Note
  • Published:

Comparison of methods to control floor contamination in an animal research facility

Lab Animal volume 41, pages 282–288 (2012)Cite this article

Abstract

The authors evaluated the effectiveness of adhesive mats, contamination control flooring, and shoe covers in decreasing the presence of microbial agents on animal holding room floors and footwear. Swab samples taken from animal holding room floors after the use of each product were compared with samples taken from rooms after no products were used. Swab samples were also taken from the heels and soles of the footwear of animal care staff before and after use of each product. The use of contamination control flooring or shoe covers significantly reduced the amount of organic material (as indicated by ATP levels measured by a luminometer) present on floors. Bacterial and ATP contamination of footwear was significantly lower after the use of shoe covers than after the use of adhesive mats or contamination control flooring, and the use of shoe covers led to a greater decrease in contamination before and after use than did use of either of the other two products. Although shoe covers were superior to both adhesive mats and contamination control flooring for decreasing contamination of animal room floors and footwear, facilities must take into account the contamination control standards required, the cost of the product, and the labor and time associated with product use when deciding which contamination control practices to implement.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Diagram of animal facility suite.
Figure 2: Contamination of animal room floors.
Figure 3: Bacterial contamination (CFU) of footwear.
Figure 4: Organic debris (RLU) on footwear.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Charrier, L. et al. Environmental hygiene of the surgery suites for the control of surgical wound infection: Italian legislation and international guidelines [Italian]. Ann. Ig. 18, 491–505 (2006).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Garner, J.S., Emori, T.G. & Haley, R.W. Operating room practices for the control of infection in U.S. hospitals, October 1976 to July 1977. Surg. Gynecol. Obstet. 155, 873–880 (1982).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Traore, O., Eschapasse, D. & Laveran, H. A bacteriological study of a contamination control tacky mat. J. Hosp. Infect. 36, 158–160 (1997).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Hingst, V. The importance of adhesive dry mats for the reduction of germ spreading in hospitals (author's transl.) [German]. Zentralbl. Bakteriol. B 167, 83–86 (1978).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Widmer, H.R. Hygienic rituals and proposals for practical action [German]. Schweiz. Med. Wochenschr. 117, 423–425 (1987).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Allen, K.P., Csida, T., Leming, J., Murray, K. & Thulin, J. Efficacy of footwear disinfection and shoe cover use in an animal research facility. Lab. Anim. (NY) 39, 107–111 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Amass, S.F. et al. Effectiveness of using a mat filled with a peroxygen disinfectant to minimize shoe sole contamination in a veterinary hospital. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 228, 1391–1396 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Dunowska, M., Morley, P.S., Patterson, G., Hyatt, D.R. & Van Metre, D.C. Evaluation of the efficacy of a peroxygen disinfectant-filled footmat for reduction of bacterial load on footwear in a large animal hospital setting. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 228, 1935–1939 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Morley, P.S., Morris, S.N., Hyatt, D.R. & Van Metre, D.C. Evaluation of the efficacy of disinfectant footbaths as used in veterinary hospitals. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 226, 2053–2058 (2005).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Stockton, K.A. et al. Evaluation of the effects of footwear hygiene protocols on nonspecific bacterial contamination of floor surfaces in an equine hospital. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 228, 1068–1073 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Copp, G., Slezak, L., Dudley, N. & Mailhot, C.B. Footwear practices and operating room contamination. Nurs. Res. 36, 366–369 (1987).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Humphreys, H., Marshall, R.J., Ricketts, V.E., Russell, A.J. & Reeves, D.S. Theatre over-shoes do not reduce operating theatre floor bacterial counts. J. Hosp. Infect. 17, 117–123 (1991).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Duquette-Petersen, L., Francis, M.E., Dohnalek, L., Skinner, R. & Dudas, P. The role of protective clothing in infection prevention in patients undergoing autologous bone marrow transplantation. Oncol. Nurs. Forum 26, 1319–1324 (1999).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hickman-Davis, J., Nicolaus, M., Petty, J.M., Harrison, D.M. & Bergdall, V.K. Effectiveness of shoe covers for bioexclusion within an animal facility. J. Am. Assoc. Lab. Anim. Sci. 51, 181–188 (2012).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Daschner, F., Frank, U. & Just, H.M. Proven and unproven methods in hospital infection control in intensive care units. Chemioterapia 6, 184–189 (1987).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Santos, A.M., Lacerda, R.A. & Graziano, K.U. Evidence of control and prevention of surgical site infection by shoe covers and private shoes: a systematic literature review [Portuguese]. Rev. Lat. Am. Enfermagem. 13, 86–92 (2005).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Weightman, N.C. & Banfield, K.R. Protective over-shoes are unnecessary in a day surgery unit. J. Hosp. Infect. 28, 1–3 (1994).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Clibbon, C. An evaluation of the effectiveness of polymeric flooring compared with “peel-off” mats to reduce wheel- and foot-borne contamination within cleanroom areas. Eur. J. Parent. Sci. 7, 13–15 (2002).

    Google Scholar 

  19. Ranta, L.S. An evaluation of polymeric flooring and its effectiveness in controlling airborne particles and microbes. Eur. J. Parent. Sci. 7, 79–80 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Ednie, D.L., Wilson, R.P. & Lang, C.M. Comparison of two sanitation monitoring methods in an animal research facility. J. Am. Assoc. Lab. Anim. Sci. 37, 71–74 (1998).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Institute of Laboratory Animal Resources (U.S.) Committee on Long-Term Holding of Laboratory Rodents. Long-term holding of laboratory rodents: a report. ILAR News 19, L1–L25 (1976).

  22. Schondelmeyer, C.W. et al. Investigation of appropriate sanitization frequency for rodent caging accessories: evidence supporting less-frequent cleaning. J. Am. Assoc. Lab. Anim. Sci. 45, 40–43 (2006).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Turner, D.E., Daugherity, E.K., Altier, C. & Maurer, K.J. Efficacy and limitations of an ATP-based monitoring system. J. Am. Assoc. Lab. Anim. Sci. 49, 190–195 (2010).

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Colquhoun, K.O., Timms, S. & Fricker, C.R. A simple method for the comparison of commercially available ATP hygiene-monitoring systems. J. Food Prot. 61, 499–501 (1998).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Davidson, C.A., Griffith, C.J., Peters, A.C. & Fielding, L.M. Evaluation of two methods for monitoring surface cleanliness-ATP bioluminescence and traditional hygiene swabbing. Luminescence 14, 33–38 (1999).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Green, T.A., Russell, S.M. & Fletcher, D.L. Effect of chemical cleaning agents and commercial sanitizers on ATP bioluminescence measurements. J. Food Prot. 62, 86–90 (1999).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Lappalainen, J. et al. Microbial testing methods for detection of residual cleaning agents and disinfectants—prevention of ATP bioluminescence measurement errors in the food industry. J. Food Prot. 63, 210–215 (2000).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Vilar, M.J., Rodríguez-Otero, J.L., Diéguez, F.J., Sanjuán, M.L. & Yus, E. Application of ATP bioluminescence for evaluation of surface cleanliness of milking equipment. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 125, 357–361 (2008).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Schweitzer, I.B. et al. Reducing exposure to laboratory animal allergens. Comp. Med. 53, 487–492 (2003).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Sarah Hills, Lisa King and Kami Young for their assistance in data collection.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Biomedical Resource Center, Office of Research, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI

    Kenneth P. Allen,  Tarrant Csida,  Jeaninne Leming,  Kathleen Murray &  Joseph Thulin

  2. Department of Microbiology and Molecular Genetics, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI

    Kenneth P. Allen

  3. Division of Allergy/Immunology, Department of Pediatrics, Medical College of Wisconsin, The Children's Research Institute, Milwaukee, WI

    Stephen B. Gauld

  4. Department of Physiology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI

    Joseph Thulin

Authors
  1. Kenneth P. Allen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tarrant Csida
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jeaninne Leming
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kathleen Murray
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Stephen B. Gauld
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Joseph Thulin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kenneth P. Allen.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare competing financial interests. A representative of Dycem Limited installed the contamination control flooring in the animal holding suites used in the study. Dycem Limited received no compensation from the Medical College of Wisconsin for the products or services rendered.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Allen, K., Csida, T., Leming, J. et al. Comparison of methods to control floor contamination in an animal research facility. Lab Anim 41, 282–288 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1038/laban1012-282

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/laban1012-282

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing