ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Public Health

Sec. Infectious Diseases: Epidemiology and Prevention

Volume 13 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2025.1557538

This article is part of the Research TopicMicrobial Resistance and Infection Control in Public Health Care SettingView all 9 articles

Comparative Effectiveness of a Multimodal Intervention Package on Surface Cleaning and Disinfection in Brazilian Neonatal Intensive Care Units

Provisionally accepted
Caroline Lopes Ciofi  SilvaCaroline Lopes Ciofi Silva1Verusca Soares de  SouzaVerusca Soares de Souza1Daniel de Macêdo  RochaDaniel de Macêdo Rocha1Alvaro  Francisco Lopes SousaAlvaro Francisco Lopes Sousa1,2*Adriana M. S.  FelixAdriana M. S. Felix2Aires Garcia dos  Santos JuniorAires Garcia dos Santos Junior1
  • 1Federal University of Mato Grosso do Sul, Campo Grande, Mato Grosso do Sul, Brazil
  • 2Hospital Sirio Libanes, São Paulo, Brazil

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

Objective: To compare the impact of a package of interventions on surface cleaning and disinfection in two public and private neonatal intensive care units (NICUs). Method: This is a quasi-experimental, quantitative study. The study consisted of three phases: baseline (phase I), implementation of the intervention package without feedback to the team (phase II), and, finally, short-term monitoring with feedback to the team (phase III). A total of 864 evaluations were carried out according to the monitoring methods: adenosine triphosphate, visual inspection, microbial load counting, and detection of Staphylococcus aureus and testing for its methicillin resistance (MRSA) in each unit over four months, evaluating six high-frequency touch surfaces, before and after cleaning and disinfection carried out by nursing and sanitizing professionals. Results: When comparing the effect of the package in the two units (public and private), no significant differences were found in the proportions of MRSA-positive surfaces in all the phases evaluated. The same occurred concerning the ATP method, which showed no significant differences between the hospitals in all study phases. Concerning the microbial count, in phase II of the study, only on one surface (scales) was a significantly lower difference found in the private hospital compared to the public one. Visual inspection indicated that the private NICU had a substantially higher proportion of surfaces with adequate hygiene in phase I: the infusion pump and the armchair; in phase II, the counter and in phase III again the counter surface. Concerning human factors, when comparing the two institutions, there were no statistically significant associations or correlations with job satisfaction. However, the public institution had higher work performance scores than the private one. Conclusion: The study highlights that the rigorous implementation of intervention packages for cleaning in NICUs, even though they are different, still showed similar results in terms of effectiveness for all the methods used, except visual inspection. This study showed that even though the employees had various levels of work performance, there was still a similar effect on the outcome of the intervention package.

Keywords: Disinfection, Infection Control, training programs, Personal Satisfaction, Work performance

Received: 08 Jan 2025; Accepted: 24 Mar 2025.

Copyright: © 2025 Silva, Souza, Rocha, Sousa, Felix and Santos Junior. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

* Correspondence: Alvaro Francisco Lopes Sousa, Hospital Sirio Libanes, São Paulo, Brazil

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Research integrity at Frontiers

94% of researchers rate our articles as excellent or good

Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.


Find out more