Chart 3.
Characterization of the studies selected where the textiles impregnated with antimicrobial substances were used in inanimate healthcare environments.
| Identification of the study | Characteristics of the study | Characteristics of the experiment | Assessment method | Results | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Design and sample size | Locus/Country and follow-up period | Types of textiles and antimicrobial substances | Applicability in health service | Hygiene settings of the textiles | |||
| Wilson et al. (43) | Randomized controlled clinical trial. Sample size (not specified in relation to the control group and intervention groups 1 and 2) totaling 45 privacy curtains (including six follow-up losses). | Surgical and Neurological ICU of the Hospital and Clinics of the University of Iowa, USA. Follow-up period: July 2018. |
Control group: unimpregnated polyester textiles. Intervention group 1: polyester textiles impregnated with halamine; Intervention group 2: polyester textiles impregnated with halamine (before and after spraying with sodium hypochlorite). | Privacy curtains hanging around the patients' beds in the health services. | Control group and intervention group 1: not specified; Intervention group 2: the curtains were sprayed twice a week with disinfectant spray based on sodium hypochlorite. | Assessment of microbial load: collection of microbiological samples from the front edge (surface not specified) of the privacy curtains, twice a week. | Microbiological assessment: after the end of the follow-up period, the mean microbial loads identified were as follows: from 30 to 40 CFUs in the control group samples; approximately 30 CFUs in the intervention group 1 samples; from 10 to 20 CFUs in the intervention group 2 samples before spraying with sodium hypochlorite; and from 0 to 10 CFUs in the intervention group 2 samples after spraying with sodium hypochlorite. The difference in the mean microbial load between the control group and intervention group 1 samples and between the control group and intervention group 2 samples before spraying was not statistically significant (p-values not shown). The difference in the mean CFU microbial load between the control group and intervention group 2 samples after spraying was statistically significant (p-value not shown). |
| Luk et al. (44) | Controlled, non-randomized clinical trial. Control group: 261 privacy curtains; Intervention group A: 46 privacy curtains; Intervention group B: 14 privacy curtains. | Medical, surgical, neurosurgical, orthopedic and rehabilitation units from 10 hospitals, China. Follow-up period: from November 2016 to November 2017. |
Control group: unimpregnated polyester textiles. Intervention group A: NWF textiles impregnated with silver additives; Intervention group B: textiles (not specified) impregnated with quaternary ammonium chloride and polyorganosiloxane. | Privacy curtains hanging around the patients' beds in the health services. | Control group: according to the policies (not specified) of each health service; Intervention groups A and B: the privacy curtains were disposable, being replaced every 3–6 months, according to the manufacturers' recommendations (not specified) or after hospital discharge of patients contaminated/infected with multidrug-resistant microorganisms, who occupied the beds where these curtains were allocated. | Assessment of microbial load: collection of microbiological samples from the front edges (of both surfaces) of the privacy curtains, twice a week over the first two follow-up weeks, and once a week over the subsequent follow-up weeks. | Microbiological assessment: in the rooms with patients contaminated/infected with multidrug-resistant microorganisms, the control group samples presented a mean of 27.57 (standard deviation of 74.26) CFUs/100 cm2, when compared to the intervention group A samples, which presented a mean of 52.35 (and standard deviation of 117.01) CFUs/100 cm2 (p = 0.042). In this configuration, the privacy curtains from group B were not allocated. In the ward cubicles, the control group samples presented a mean of 57.23 (standard deviation 102.55) CFUs/100 cm2, when compared to the intervention group A samples, which had a mean of 86.98 (standard deviation 153.84) CFUs/100 cm2 (p < 0.001), and to the intervention group B samples, with a mean of 1.41 (standard deviation 13.28) CFUs/100 cm2 (p < 0.001). |
| Kotsanas et al. (45) | Quasi-experimental study. Sample size: 14 privacy curtains. | ICU of the Dandenong Hospital, Australia. Follow-up period: from December 2012 to June 2013. |
Intervention: polypropylene textiles, impregnated with antibacterial and antifungal chemicals (not specified) and silver nanometers. | Privacy curtains hanging around the patients' beds in the health services. | The privacy curtains were disposable, being replaced every 6 months. | Assessment of microbial load: collection of microbiological samples from the front edges (from both surfaces) of the privacy curtains, once a month. | Microbiological assessment: a median of 3 CFUs (from 0 to 83) was identified in the samples of antimicrobial privacy curtains. |
ICU, Intensive Care Unit; USA, United States of America; CFU, Colony Forming Unit; NWF, Non-Woven Fabric.