Potentiation of Disinfectant Efficiency of Different Dilutions of Ethanol, Bleach and Phenolics against Pseudomonas Aeruginosa and Staphylococcus Aureus
Abstract
Ethanol, Bleach and Phenolics are three kinds of disinfectants which have been widely used in common laboratories. In this study, a compared experiment on these three disinfectants efficiency was conducted against Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa using agar hole diffusion method. Different concentrations of bleach (1%, 2%, 3%, 4% and 5%) were used on both organisms. Also (50%, 60%, 70%, 85% and 95%) of ethanol as well as (5%, 10%, 20%, 25%, and 30%) Phenolics were used. Differences in concentrations tested was because, the original concentrations of the disinfectants differs. After 24 hours of incubation at 370C, the results showed that all the disinfectants inhibited the growth of the test organism in their concentrated forms. The diameter of zone of inhibitions were measured around each well by using a ruler in millimeters, using different concentrations, their efficacies varied. The results showed that 30% Phenolics had the best efficiency against both test organisms and 5% bleach had a better effect on Staphylococcus aureus than Pseudomonas aeruginosa, while ethanol showed least sensitivity. 70% concentration gave the highest effect on Staphylococcus aureus as compared with Pseudomonas aeruginosa.
          Â
References
• Barindra. S. Ghosh. D, Saha. M, Mukherjee .J. (2006). Purification and Characterization of a Salt, Solvent, Detergent And Bleach Tolerant Protease From A New Gamma-Proteobacterium Isolated from the Marine Environment of the sundarbans. Process Biochemistry, 41(1);208-215.
• Bittel, K. and Hughes, R. (2003). Superfluous and Antibiotic Resistance Pulse, University of Arizona.Retrieved from http://Pulse_ Pharmacy.ariozna.edu/Disease_Epidemics/science.html. Accessed on May 27, 2010.
• Bhatia .R. and Ichhpujani. R.(2008). Essentials of Medical Microbiology,4th edition. New Delhi India, Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers Limited.Pp:54-55,141,259.
• Cheesbrough. M. (2000). District Laboratory Practice, Tropical Countries; part 2. United Kingdom, Cambridge university press Edinburgh.Pp:64-66,70
• Cooper , M.S.,(2000). Biocides, disinfectants and preservative. The Microbiological Update: 18 (3); 1-4.
• CRS, (2005). Progress in the control of airborne infections. American Journal of Public Health and the Nation’s Health. 40(1): 82 – 88. (Committee on Research Standards).
• Carly, N. J, DiCristina, J.A, and Lindsay. D. S,(2006). Activity of bleach, ethanol and two commercial disinfectants against spores of Encephalitozoon cuniculi. Veterinary Parasitology, 136(1);3-4,31(1);343-346.
• Cristina,V. D ., Farias, L. M, Diniz, C.G, Alvarez-Leite, M .E and Camargo ,E R,(2005). New Methods in the evaluation of chemical disinfectants used in health care services. American Journal of Infection Control, 33(3);162-169.
• DHQP, (2009). Cleaning and Disinfecting, Retrieved from www.cdc.gov /oralhealth/infectioncontrol/glossary.htm. Accessed on July 6, 2010 (Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion).
• Fraise, A.P.(1999). Choosing disinfectants. Journal of Hospital Infection,43(4);255-264.
• Gaonkar, T.A, Geraldo.I., Shintre.M. and Modak, S.M(2006). In vivo efficacy of an alcohol-based surgical hand disinfectant containing a synergistic combination of ethylhexylglycerin and preservatives. Journal of Hospital Infection,63(12)147-155.
• Hamamah, A.A. (2004). Do Different Dilutions of Disinfectants Affect the Development of Bacterial Resistance California State Science Fair Abstract. Retrieved from http://www.usc.edu/cssf/history/2004/ projects. Accessed on May 27, 2010.
• Ho-Hyuk .J, Sung-Ho.A, and Kim, M. D,(2008). Use of hydrogen peroxide as an effective disinfectant to Actinobacillus ureae. Process Biochemistry,43(4);225-228.
• Johnson, T., and Case, C., (1995). Chemical Methods of Control. Adapted from Laboratory Experiments in Microbiology. 4th edition. Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Company, Redwood City From National Health Museum, http://www.accessexcellence.org/ activity_exchange.
• Lages, S.L., Ramakrishnan, M.A. and Goyal, S.M. (2008). In-vivo Efficacy of Hand Sanitisers Against Feline Calicivirus: a Surrogate for Norovirus. The Journal of Hospital Infection; 68(2): 159 – 163.
• Larson. E.L, and Morton, H .E,(1991). Disinfection, Sterilization and Preservation,4th edition. Pp11-15.
• Moorer., W.R. (2009). Effectiveness of 70% Ethanol.Retrieved from http/www.wikianswers/ethanol.com. Accessed on 23/08/2010.
• McDonell, G. and Russel A. (2001). Antiseptic, disinfectant activity, action and resistance . Clinical Microbiology Review. 14(12): 227 – 247.
• Moorer, W.R., (2003). Antiviral activity of alcohol for surface disinfection. International Journal of Dental Hygiene, 1(3): 138
• Rollins, D.M., and Joseph S.W., (2000). Antibiotoic Disk Susceptibilities Department of Cell Biology and Molecular Genetics, University of Maryland. http://www.life.edu/classroom/bsci424/labmaterials method/antibioticdisk.htm.
• Stephen, B., Qiang, Z. Fan, R. Kametia, M. and Schwab, C. (2004).Ethanol suppresses cytokine responses induced through Toll-like receptors as well as innate resistance to Eschericha coli in mouse model for bridge drinking. Alcohol, 33(2): 147 – 155.
• Uzoechi A. U. , Dike S.K., Nwanekwu K.E.N (2016) Anti-microbial Evaluation of SomeAnti-Diarrhoreal Plants Used by indigenous Abajah and Amaigbo people, Imo State Nigerian journal of Microbiology 2016 Vol 30
• Weber, D.J., Barbee S.L., Sobsey, M.D. and Rutala W.A., (2000). The Effect of Blood On The Antiviral Activity of Sodium Hypochlorite, A Phenolic and a Quaternary Ammonium Compound. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology 20(12): 821 – 827.
• Yi Hsing L., Miyamoto C., and Meighen E.A., (2002). Cloning Sequencing and Functional Studies of the Posgene From Vibrio Larve. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications, 293(1): 26, 456 – 462.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
- Papers must be submitted on the understanding that they have not been published elsewhere (except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture, review, or thesis) and are not currently under consideration by another journal published by any other publisher.
- It is also the authors responsibility to ensure that the articles emanating from a particular source are submitted with the necessary approval.
- The authors warrant that the paper is original and that he/she is the author of the paper, except for material that is clearly identified as to its original source, with permission notices from the copyright owners where required.
- The authors ensure that all the references carefully and they are accurate in the text as well as in the list of references (and vice versa).
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
- The journal/publisher is not responsible for subsequent uses of the work. It is the author's responsibility to bring an infringement action if so desired by the author.
