The fact that cellular phones and other mobile
communication devices can become contaminated with potentially pathogenic
organisms is not new. To my knowledge, the Brady article, “Is Your Phone Bugged”, from the American Journal of Infection Control was first to identify
these devices as potential reservoirs for pathogens. Even when cellular phones were banished from
hospitals, Brady discovered that up to 25% of healthcare workers’ personal
phones were contaminated with healthcare-associated microbes, including MRSA
and VRE. As concern about disturbance of
electromagnetic fields diminishes - even airlines allow us to keep our phones
and tablets on - mobile phones and other
such high-touch communication devices are making strong inroads to acute care
settings. Their presence is generating new studies on the infection transmission
risk associated with their use.
communication devices can become contaminated with potentially pathogenic
organisms is not new. To my knowledge, the Brady article, “Is Your Phone Bugged”, from the American Journal of Infection Control was first to identify
these devices as potential reservoirs for pathogens. Even when cellular phones were banished from
hospitals, Brady discovered that up to 25% of healthcare workers’ personal
phones were contaminated with healthcare-associated microbes, including MRSA
and VRE. As concern about disturbance of
electromagnetic fields diminishes - even airlines allow us to keep our phones
and tablets on - mobile phones and other
such high-touch communication devices are making strong inroads to acute care
settings. Their presence is generating new studies on the infection transmission
risk associated with their use.
A group from University College London published an
article in the Journal of Infection Prevention, comparing keypad phones to
touch screen phones, particularly in an acute care hospital setting (“Keypad mobile phones are associated with a significant increased risk of microbial contamination compared to touch screen phones”,). The authors observed that the
majority of healthcare professionals use the same mobile phone inside and
outside the workplace, and thus risks contamination to other departments, hospitals,
and the community. Many of the phones in use today have touch screens with a
solitary smooth surface, as opposed to a keypad with separate buttons and
numerous crevices. The authors postulated that, of the two styles of devices,
bacterial contamination would be lower on touch screen phones.
article in the Journal of Infection Prevention, comparing keypad phones to
touch screen phones, particularly in an acute care hospital setting (“Keypad mobile phones are associated with a significant increased risk of microbial contamination compared to touch screen phones”,). The authors observed that the
majority of healthcare professionals use the same mobile phone inside and
outside the workplace, and thus risks contamination to other departments, hospitals,
and the community. Many of the phones in use today have touch screens with a
solitary smooth surface, as opposed to a keypad with separate buttons and
numerous crevices. The authors postulated that, of the two styles of devices,
bacterial contamination would be lower on touch screen phones.
Even in this rather small sampling, the results were
telling. Nine of the 67 samples grew
either MRSA or VRE, all but one of those being from keypad phones. All of the
“on-call” phones were keypad models, which might have skewed the results, since
40% of these phones showed MRSA or VRE contamination. Of the touch screen
phones, 17 were iPhones, none of which were contaminated with potential
pathogens. To confirm their results the
authors repeated the study in another hospital, and with a larger sampling of
126 touchscreen phones, and 47 keypad phones. This second facility had a lower
baseline MRSA rate than in the first hospital. In this second attempt, 5 of the
touchscreen phones (4%) were contaminated with MRSA. None of the keypad phones
were contaminated with MRSA or VRE, but overall the bacterial colony counts
were higher with keypad phones.
telling. Nine of the 67 samples grew
either MRSA or VRE, all but one of those being from keypad phones. All of the
“on-call” phones were keypad models, which might have skewed the results, since
40% of these phones showed MRSA or VRE contamination. Of the touch screen
phones, 17 were iPhones, none of which were contaminated with potential
pathogens. To confirm their results the
authors repeated the study in another hospital, and with a larger sampling of
126 touchscreen phones, and 47 keypad phones. This second facility had a lower
baseline MRSA rate than in the first hospital. In this second attempt, 5 of the
touchscreen phones (4%) were contaminated with MRSA. None of the keypad phones
were contaminated with MRSA or VRE, but overall the bacterial colony counts
were higher with keypad phones.
The authors concluded that touchscreen phones have lower
bacterial colonization when compared to keypad phones. Keypad mobile phones
were more likely to be contaminated with higher colony counts of bacteria, and
the majority of drug-resistant bacteria were isolated from keypad phones. The
keypad is the area in contact with the fingertips, and intermittent handling of
mobile phones during and between patient consultations is a means for
transmission and conceivably reduces the effectiveness of hand hygiene.
bacterial colonization when compared to keypad phones. Keypad mobile phones
were more likely to be contaminated with higher colony counts of bacteria, and
the majority of drug-resistant bacteria were isolated from keypad phones. The
keypad is the area in contact with the fingertips, and intermittent handling of
mobile phones during and between patient consultations is a means for
transmission and conceivably reduces the effectiveness of hand hygiene.
I suppose I should be "happy" that my iPhone
and iPad, which are frequently played with by my 5-year son, would be expected
to have fewer bugs than similar devices with keypads. That is, at least before he got his hands on
them! But moving outside of the hospital
where the frequency of cleaning and disinfection does not occur with the same
frequency, what level of contamination would we see? I shudder at the thought of the level of
contamination to be found on the keypads of debit machines.....how many times
have you paid for groceries and then proceeded to have a snack on the way home
without cleaning your hands first? To
that I can answer....not anymore!
and iPad, which are frequently played with by my 5-year son, would be expected
to have fewer bugs than similar devices with keypads. That is, at least before he got his hands on
them! But moving outside of the hospital
where the frequency of cleaning and disinfection does not occur with the same
frequency, what level of contamination would we see? I shudder at the thought of the level of
contamination to be found on the keypads of debit machines.....how many times
have you paid for groceries and then proceeded to have a snack on the way home
without cleaning your hands first? To
that I can answer....not anymore!
Bugging Off!
Nicole
