Inactivation of SARS-CoV-2 on surfaces and in solution with Virusend (TX-10), a novel disinfectant

Persistence of SARS-CoV-2 and its surrogate, bacteriophage Phi6, on surfaces and in water

IMPORTANCE

The COVID-19 pandemic spurred research on the persistence of SARS-CoV-2 and its surrogates. Here we highlight the importance of evaluating viral surrogates and experimental methodologies when studying pathogen survival in the environment.

Evaluation of the impact of different disinfectants on new coronavirus and human health

A new health threat was appeared in 2019 known as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) or coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The new coronavirus distributed all over the world and caused millions of deaths. One way to incomplete the process of COVID-19 transfer from one person to another is using disinfectants. A narrative review study was done on manuscript published documents about the stability of the virus, different types of disinfectants and the effects of disinfectants on SARS-CoV2 and environment from 2005 to 2022 based on Searched databases included Google Scholar, Springer, PubMed, Web of Science and Science Direct (Scopus). All relevant studies published 2005 until 2022 gathered. According to the databases, 670 articles were retrieved. Thirty studies were screened after review and 30 full-text articles entered into the analysis process. Finally, 14 articles were selected in this study. New coronavirus could survive until 9 days in room temperature; the surviving time decreases if temperature increases. The virus can survive in various plastic, glass, and metal surfaces for hours to days. Disinfectants, such as alcohol, isopropanol, formaldehyde, glutaraldehyde, and ethanol, can kill 70-90% viruses in up to 30 s but should be noted that these disinfectants are recognized by Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) as a potential carcinogen. According to the different reports, increased duration and level of disinfectant exposure can have negative impacts on human and animal health including upper and lower respiratory tract irritation, inflammation, edema, ulceration, and allergic reactions.

Porous Cellulose Thin Films as Sustainable and Effective Antimicrobial Surface Coatings

In the present work, we developed an effective antimicrobial surface film based on sustainable microfibrillated cellulose. The resulting porous cellulose thin film is barely noticeable to human eyes due to its submicrometer thickness, of which the surface coverage, porosity, and microstructure can be modulated by the formulations and the coating process. Using goniometers and a quartz crystal microbalance, we observed a threefold reduction in water contact angles and accelerated water evaporation kinetics on the cellulose film (more than 50% faster than that on a flat glass surface). The porous cellulose film exhibits a rapid inactivation effect against SARS-CoV-2 in 5 min, following deposition of virus-loaded droplets, and an exceptional ability to reduce contact transfer of liquid, e.g., respiratory droplets, to surfaces such as an artificial skin by 90% less than that from a planar glass substrate. It also shows excellent antimicrobial performance in inhibiting the growth of both Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria (Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus epidermidis) due to the intrinsic porosity and hydrophilicity. Additionally, the cellulose film shows nearly 100% resistance to scraping in dry conditions due to its strong affinity to the supporting substrate but with good removability once wetted with water, suggesting its practical suitability for daily use. Importantly, the coating can be formed on solid substrates readily by spraying, which requires solely a simple formulation of a plant-based cellulose material with no chemical additives, rendering it a scalable, affordable, and green solution as antimicrobial surface coating. Implementing such cellulose films could thus play a significant role in controlling future pan- and epidemics, particularly during the initial phase when suitable medical intervention needs to be developed and deployed.

Evaluating the effects of air disinfectants in decontamination of COVID-19 aerosols

Introduction

Airborne transmission is the most  crucial mode of COVID-19 transmission. Therefore, disinfecting the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) aerosols float can have important implications in limiting COVID-19 transmission. Herein, we aimed to review the studies that utilized various disinfectants to decontaminate and inactivate the SARS-CoV-2 aerosols.

Methods

This study was a review that studied related articles published between December 1, 2019 and August 23, 2022. We searched the online databases of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane, on August 23, 2021. The studies were downloaded into the EndNote software, duplicates were removed, and then the studies were screened based on the inclusion/exclusion criteria. The screening process involved two steps; first, the studies were screened based on their title and abstract and then their full texts. The included studies were used for the qualitative analysis.

Results

From 664 retrieved records, only 31 met the inclusion criteria and were included in the final qualitative analysis. Various materials like Ozone, H₂O₂, alcohol, and TiO₂ and methods like heating and using Ultraviolet were described in these studies to disinfect places contaminated by COVID-19. It appeared that the efficacy of these disinfectants varies considerably depending on the situation, time, and ultimately their mode of application.

Conclusion

Following reliable protocols in combination with the proper selection of disinfectant agents for each purpose would serve to achieve desired elimination of the SARS-CoV-2 transmission.

Rapid qualitative analysis in a mixed-methods evaluation of an infection prevention intervention in a UK hospital setting during the COVID-19 pandemic: A discussion of the CLEAN study methodology

The COVID-19 pandemic created an urgent need for high-quality rapid research. One clinical challenge was how to minimise the risk of transmission in the hospital setting. The CLEAN study conducted a rapid evaluation of the potential utility of a spray-based disinfectant in a hospital setting. The study was undertaken between December 2020 and March 2021 and involved the implementation of the spray in 10 different clinical areas in one UK teaching hospital. A mixed-methods approach was adopted (including observations, surveys, and qualitative interviews) informed by the theories for understanding the implementation of new healthcare technologies. The evaluation found that while the spray had a number of perceived benefits when added to existing disinfection processes, other factors limited its potential utility. These findings informed a number of recommendations for future adoption within hospital settings. This paper describes and reflects on the rapid methodology that allowed us to undertake the study and deliver results in a short space of time. We experienced a number of pressures during set-up and fieldwork due to the challenging conditions caused by the pandemic, and the methodological approach had to evolve throughout the study because of the changing clinical context. The involvement of clinicians from the research setting as full members of the research team was key to the rapid delivery of the research. They provided an essential link to the implementation environment, and their experiential knowledge of the setting added an important perspective to the analysis. Balancing their involvement with their clinical roles was challenging, however, as was coordinating a large and diverse team of interviewers in such a short space of time. Overall, the study highlighted the value of rapid research to inform urgent healthcare decisions in a pandemic. Although our experience suggests that conducting such research requires some practical and methodological trade-offs, we found that there were also numerous benefits of using rapid methods and identified various opportunities to ensure their robustness.

Disinfectants against SARS-CoV-2: A Review

The pandemic due to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has emerged as a serious global public health issue. Besides the high transmission rate from individual to individual, indirect transmission from inanimate objects or surfaces poses a more significant threat. Since the start of the outbreak, the importance of respiratory protection, social distancing, and chemical disinfection to prevent the spread of the virus has been the prime focus for infection control. Health regulatory organizations have produced guidelines for the formulation and application of chemical disinfectants to manufacturing industries and the public. On the other hand, extensive literature on the virucidal efficacy testing of microbicides for SARS-CoV-2 has been published over the past year and a half. This review summarizes the studies on the most common chemical disinfectants and their virucidal efficacy against SARS-CoV-2, including the type and concentration of the chemical disinfectant, the formulation, the presence of excipients, the exposure time, and other critical factors that determine the effectiveness of chemical disinfectants. In this review, we also critically appraise these disinfectants and conduct a discussion on the role they can play in the COVID-19 pandemic.

CPC-containing oral rinses inactivate SARS-CoV-2 variants and are active in the presence of human saliva

Introduction. The importance of human saliva in aerosol-based transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is now widely recognized. However, little is known about the efficacy of virucidal mouthwash formulations against emergent SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern and in the presence of saliva.

Hypothesis. Mouthwashes containing virucidal actives will have similar inactivation effects against multiple SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern and will retain efficacy in the presence of human saliva.

Aim. To examine in vitro efficacy of mouthwash formulations to inactivate SARS-CoV-2 variants.

Methodology. Inactivation of SARS-CoV-2 variants by mouthwash formulations in the presence or absence of human saliva was assayed using ASTM International Standard E1052-20 methodology.

Results. Appropriately formulated mouthwashes containing 0.07 % cetylpyridinium chloride but not 0.2 % chlorhexidine completely inactivated SARS-CoV-2 (USA-WA1/2020, Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta) up to the limit of detection in suspension assays. Tests using USA-WA1/2020 indicates that efficacy is maintained in the presence of human saliva.

Conclusions. Together these data suggest cetylpyridinium chloride-based mouthwashes are effective at inactivating SARS-CoV-2 variants. This indicates potential to reduce viral load in the oral cavity and mitigate transmission via salivary aerosols.

Disinfection methods against SARS-CoV-2: a systematic review

Background

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), the causative agent of coronavirus disease 2019, has caused millions of deaths worldwide. The virus is transmitted by inhalation of infectious particles suspended in the air, direct deposition on mucous membranes and indirect contact via contaminated surfaces. Disinfection methods that can halt such transmission are important in this pandemic and in future viral infections.

Aim

To highlight the efficacy of several disinfection methods against SARS-CoV-2 based on up-to-date evidence found in the literature.

Methods

Two databases were searched to identify studies that assessed disinfection methods used against SARS-CoV-2. In total, 1229 studies were identified and 60 of these were included in this review. Quality assessment was evaluated by the Office of Health Assessment and Translation's risk-of-bias tool.

Findings

Twenty-eight studies investigated disinfection methods on environmental surfaces, 16 studies investigated disinfection methods on biological surfaces, four studies investigated disinfection methods for airborne coronavirus, and 16 studies investigated methods used to recondition personal protective equipment (PPE).

Conclusions

Several household and hospital disinfection agents and ultraviolet-C (UV-C) irradiation were effective for inactivation of SARS-CoV-2 on environmental surfaces. Formulations containing povidone-iodine can provide virucidal action on the skin and mucous membranes. In the case of hand hygiene, typical soap bars and alcohols can inactivate SARS-CoV-2. Air filtration systems incorporated with materials that possess catalytic properties, UV-C devices and heating systems can reduce airborne viral particles effectively. The decontamination of PPE can be conducted safely by heat and ozone treatment.

The role of disinfectants and sanitizers during COVID-19 pandemic: advantages and deleterious effects on humans and the environment

Disinfectants and sanitizers are essential preventive agents against the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic; however, the pandemic crisis was marred by undue hype, which led to the indiscriminate use of disinfectants and sanitizers. Despite demonstrating a beneficial role in the control and prevention of COVID-19, there are crucial concerns regarding the large-scale use of disinfectants and sanitizers, including the side effects on human and animal health along with harmful impacts exerted on the environment and ecological balance. This article discusses the roles of disinfectants and sanitizers in the control and prevention of the current pandemic and highlights updated disinfection techniques against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). This article provides evidence of the deleterious effects of disinfectants and sanitizers exerted on humans, animals, and the environment as well as suggests mitigation strategies to reduce these effects. Additionally, potential technologies and approaches for the reduction of these effects and the development of safe, affordable, and effective disinfectants are discussed, particularly, eco-friendly technologies using nanotechnology and nanomedicine.