Basit öğe kaydını göster

dc.contributor.authorÖzpolat B.
dc.contributor.authorÇavuşoğlu T.
dc.contributor.authorYilmaz S.
dc.contributor.authorBüyükkoçak U.
dc.contributor.authorGünaydin S.
dc.date.accessioned2020-06-25T15:14:43Z
dc.date.available2020-06-25T15:14:43Z
dc.date.issued2011
dc.identifier.citationÖzpolat, B., Yılmaz, S., Büyükkoçak, Ü., Günaydın, S., Çavuşoğlu, T. (2011). Clinical and laboratory evaluation of anti-microbial efficacy of photocatalysts. Journal of Clinical and Analytical Medicine, 2(2), 32 - 35.en_US
dc.identifier.issn13090720
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.4328/JCAM.262
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12587/2178
dc.description.abstractAim This study aims at investigating and testing the tentative antimicrobial efficacy; in vitro and in- hospital applications of apatite coated ferrum titanate which is one of the new generation photocatalysts. Material and Methods 30 sterile petri dishes were kept under florescent light for 4 days following the application of 20 ppm apatite coated ferrum titanate aerosol. 0.5 McFarland (1.5X108 CFU/mL -CFU=colony forming unit) Pseudomonas aeruginosa and 0.5 McFarland Acinetobacter baumannii were cultured on 10 separate dishes. 10 unprocessed dishes were used as controls. Samples were evaluated for bacterial survival rate (CFUX100/CFU) after application. In the second step, same photocatalyst aerosol was applied as 0.012 L/m2 with the specific kit on the surfaces of different units within the hospital. Particle count was measured and compared before and one-month after the photocatalyst application by lumimeter. Results Bacterial survival rate was significantly lower on photocatalyst applied surfaces versus control for Pseudomonas aeruginosa after second day of application (p<0.001) (60±8% / 95±9%). This difference continued up to the 4th day gradually (3. day: 35±5% / 90±9%; 4. day:22±5% / 85±8%). Bacterial survival rate was significantly lower on photocatalyst applied surfaces versus control for Acinetobacter baumannii after the second day of application (55±7% / 87±8%) (p<0.01). This difference continued up to the 4th day gradually (3. day:40±5% / 80±8%; 4. day:15±5% / 78±7%). Particle count on photocatalyst applied surfaces diminished 97.15% in operating room, 95.61% in ICU, 98.30 in physicians' room, 94.13% in wards and 97.04% in hospital kitchen. Conclusions As a result of our pioneering study on the evaluation of photocatalyst, we think that it may be one of the economic and safe alternative methods of hospital sterilization based on bactericidal and bacteriostatic efficacy confirmed in both laboratory and clinical applications.en_US
dc.language.isoturen_US
dc.relation.isversionof10.4328/JCAM.262en_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectAnti-Infective Agentsen_US
dc.subjectMicrobial Sensitivity Testsen_US
dc.subjectTitanium Dioxideen_US
dc.titleClinical and laboratory evaluation of anti-microbial efficacy of photocatalystsen_US
dc.title.alternativeFotokatalizörlerin anti-mikrobiyal etkinliğinin klinik ve laboratuar ortamda değerlendirilmesien_US
dc.typearticleen_US
dc.contributor.departmentKırıkkale Üniversitesien_US
dc.identifier.volume2en_US
dc.identifier.issue2en_US
dc.identifier.startpage32en_US
dc.identifier.endpage35en_US
dc.relation.journalJournal of Clinical and Analytical Medicineen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Ulusal Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US


Bu öğenin dosyaları:

Thumbnail

Bu öğe aşağıdaki koleksiyon(lar)da görünmektedir.

Basit öğe kaydını göster