Table 3.
The effectiveness of VHP decontamination in the environment of the oral surgery office
| Place of sampling | Total number of bacteria | Reduction R [%] | Total number of fungi | Reduction R [%] | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| before VHP | after VHP | before VHP | after VHP | |||
| Surfaces: | [CFU/100 cm2] | [CFU/100 cm2] | ||||
| Armrest of dental chairs | 5.5 × 103 ± 4.6 × 102 | 8.5 × 101 ± 6.1 × 100* | 98.45 | 2.3 × 102 ± 2.0 × 102 | 0.0 × 100 ± 0.0 × 100* | 100.00 |
| Wooden frames | 2.4 × 102 ± 5.2 × 101 | 4.0 × 100 ± 2.0 × 100* | 98.33 | 5.3 × 104 ± 8.6 × 103 | 3.3 × 101 ± 8.6 × 100* | 99.94 |
| Medical aprons | 6.2 × 102 ± 9.1 × 101 | 5.0 × 100 ± 2.4 × 100* | 99.19 | 7.1 × 101 ± 6.6 × 101 | 0.0 × 100 ± 0.0 × 100* | 100.00 |
| Air: | [CFU/1 m3] | [CFU/1 m3] | ||||
| At the door | 8.8 × 102 ± 5.8 × 101 | 0.0 × 100 ± 0.0 × 100* | 100.00 | 6.9 × 102 ± 1.2 × 102 | 0.0 × 100 ± 0.0 × 100* | 100.00 |
| In the middle of the room | 7.2 × 102 ± 9.4 × 101 | 0.0 × 100 ± 0.0 × 100* | 100.00 | 5.7 × 102 ± 1.1 × 102 | 0.0 × 100 ± 0.0 × 100* | 100.00 |
Mean ± standard deviation; *statistically significant difference between samples before and after VHP decontamination, ANOVA at a significance level of p < 0.05