Cover Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association
Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association
ISSN:
0003-1488
Publication Date:
15 Jun 2006
  • 1

    Morley PS, Morris SN, Hyatt DR, et al. Evaluation of the efficacy of disinfectant footbaths as used in veterinary hospitals. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2005;226:2053–2058.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2

    Traub-Dargatz JL, Dargatz DA, Morley PS, et al. An overview of infection control strategies for equine facilities, with an emphasis on veterinary hospitals. Vet Clin North Am Equine Pract 2004;20:507–520.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3

    Smith BP. Evolution of equine infection control programs. Vet Clin North Am Equine Pract 2004;20:521–530.

  • 4

    Amass SF, Ragland D, Spicer P. Evaluation of the efficacy of a peroxygen compound, Virkon(R)S, as a boot bath disinfectant. J Swine Health Prod 2001;9:121–123.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5

    Amass SF, Vyverberg BD, Ragland D, et al. Evaluating the efficacy of boot baths in biosecurity protocols. J Swine Health Prod 2000;8:169–173.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6

    Cremiux A, Freney J, Davin-Regli A. Methods of testing disinfectants. In: Block SS, ed. Disinfection, sterilization, and preservation. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2001;1305–1327.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7

    Quinn PJ, Markey BK. Disinfection and disease prevention in veterinary medicine. In: Block SS, ed. Disinfection, sterilization, and preservation. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2001;1069–1104.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8

    Edwards JE, McEwan NR, Travis AJ, et al. 16S rDNA library-based analysis of ruminal bacterial diversity. Antonie Van Leeuwenhoek 2004;86:263–281.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9

    Stockton KA, Morley PS, Hyatt DR, et al. Effects of footwear hygiene protocols on bacterial contamination of floor surfaces in an equine hospital. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2006;228:1068–1073.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10

    Vesley D, Klapes NA, Benzow K, et al. Microbiological evaluation of wet and dry floor sanitization systems in hospital patient rooms. Appl Environ Microbiol 1987;53:1042–1045.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11

    Dancer SJ. How do we assess hospital cleaning? A proposal for microbiological standards for surface hygiene in hospitals. J Hosp Infect 2004;56:10–15.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12

    Sagoo SK, Little CL, Griffith CJ, et al. Study of cleaning standards and practices in food premises in the United Kingdom. Commun Dis Public Health 2003;6:6–17.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13

    Gasparini R, Pozzi T, Magnelli R, et al. Evaluation of in vitro efficacy of the disinfectant Virkon. Eur J Epidemiol 1995;11:193–197.

  • 14

    DuPont Animal Health Solutions. Virkon S—bacterial efficacy. Available at: www.antecint.co.uk/main/virkonba.htm. Accessed Jan 25, 2006.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15

    Hernndez A, Martro E, Matas L, et al. Assessment of in-vitro efficacy of 1% Virkon against bacteria, fungi, viruses and spores by means of AFNOR guidelines. J Hosp Infect 2000;46:203–209.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16

    Gibbens JC, Pascoe SJ, Evans SJ, et al. A trial of biosecurity as a means to control Campylobacter infection of broiler chickens. Prev Vet Med 2001;48:85–99.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17

    Evans SJ, Sayers AR. A longitudinal study of campylobacter infection of broiler flocks in Great Britain. Prev Vet Med 2000;46:209–223.

  • 18

    van de Giessen AW, Bloemberg BP, Ritmeester WS, et al. Epidemiological study on risk factors and risk reducing measures for campylobacter infections in Dutch broiler flocks. Epidemiol Infect 1996;117:245–250.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19

    Reed GA, Alley DU. Efficacy of a novel copper-based footbath preparation for the treatment of ovine footrot during the spread period. Aust Vet J 1996;74:375–382.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20

    Fiedler A. Sense and nonsense of footbaths. Milchpraxis 2002;40:112–117.

  • 21

    Seymour J, Durkin J, Bathina H, et al. Footbathing in the management of digital dermatitis, in Proceedings. 12th Int Symp Lameness Ruminants 2002;374–376.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22

    Hinton DG. Eradication of actively spreading ovine footrot. Aust Vet J 1991;68:118–119.

  • 23

    Dee S, Deen J, Pijoan C. Evaluation of 4 intervention strategies to prevent the mechanical transmission of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus. Can J Vet Res 2004;68:19–26.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24

    Kirk JH, Sischo WM, Barnett SC, et al. Salmonella contamination of rubber boots worn on dairies. Bovine Pract 2002;36:11–14.

  • 25

    Kirk J, Boggs C, Jeffrey J, et al. Efficacy of disinfectants for sanitizing boots under dairy farm conditions. Bovine Pract 2003;37:50–53.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Advertisement

Evaluation of the efficacy of a peroxygen disinfectant-filled footmat for reduction of bacterial load on footwear in a large animal hospital setting

Magdalena Dunowska LW, PhD1, Paul S. Morley DVM, PhD, DACVIM2, Gage Patterson MS3, Doreene R. Hyatt PhD4, and David C. Van Metre DVM, DACVIM5
View More View Less
  • 1 Animal Population Health Institute, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523.
  • | 2 Animal Population Health Institute, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523.
  • | 3 Animal Population Health Institute, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523.
  • | 4 Animal Population Health Institute, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523.
  • | 5 Animal Population Health Institute, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523.
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2460/javma.228.12.1935
Volume/Issue:
Volume 228: Issue 12
Online Publication Date:
15 Jun 2006
Restricted access
Reprints and Permissions Purchase Article

Abstract

Objective—To compare the efficacy of a peroxygenbased disinfectant used in footbaths with the efficacy of the same disinfectant used in footmats for reducing bacterial contamination of footwear in a large animal hospital.

Design—Prospective study.

Sample Population—Bacteria recovered from the soles of rubber boots after experimental microbial contamination and exposure to disinfectant solutions or water (water-treated control boots) or no treatment (untreated control boots).

Procedures—Investigators contaminated boots by walking through soiled animal bedding. Swab samples were collected from the sole of 1 untreated boot (right or left); the other boot was treated as investigators stepped through a disinfectant-filled footbath, a disinfectant-filled footmat, or water-filled footmat. Samples were collected 10 minutes after each treatment. Differences in numbers of bacteria recovered from treated and untreated boots were analyzed.

Results—Mean bacterial counts from peroxygentreated boots were 1.3 to 1.4 log10 lower (95.4% to 99.8%) than the counts from untreated boots. Results were similar for footmat- and footbath-treated boots. In contrast, there were no statistically detectable differences in mean bacterial counts in samples collected from water-treated or untreated boots.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Results suggest that footmats and footbaths containing peroxygenbased disinfectant are effective in reducing bacterial contamination on the soles of boots when used in conditions representative of large animal hospitals. Similar results were achieved with use of either footmats or footbaths. The use of footbaths and footmats containing effective disinfectants may help decrease the risk for spread of nosocomial infection but should not be expected to sterilize footwear.

Contributor Notes

Supported by the Animal Population Health Institute through a grant from the USDA Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES) and by the James L. Voss Veterinary Teaching Hospital.

Address correspondence to Dr. Morley.