Antimicrobial efficacy and durability of copper formulations over one year of hospital use
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate three formulations of copper (Cu) based self-sanitizing surfaces for antimicrobial efficacy and durability over one year in inpatient clinical areas and laboratories. Design: Randomized control trial. Setting: Three Cu formulations were assessed a) solid alloy 80% Cu 20% Ni (integral copper), b) spray–on 80% Cu 20% Ni (spray-on) and c) 16% composite Cu-impregnated surface. Coupons (1cm2 ) of the three products and control surgical grade (AISI 316) stainless steel (SS) were inserted into gaskets and adhered onto clinical carts used in patient care areas (including Emergency and Maternity units) (n=480) and on microbiology laboratory bench workspaces (n=240). The microbial burden and assessment of resistance to wear, corrosion, and material compatibility were determined every three months. Three tertiary care Canadian adult and one paediatric/maternity hospital participated. Results: Cu formulations used on inpatient units statistically significantly reduced bacterial bioburden compared to SS at months 3 and 6. Only the integral product had significantly less bacteria compared to SS at month 12. There were no statistically significant differences in microbial burden between Cu formulations and SS coupons on microbiology laboratory benches where bacterial counts were low overall. All mass changes and corrosion rates of the formulations were acceptable by engineering standards. Conclusions: Cu surfaces vary in their antimicrobial efficacy after one year in-hospital use. Frequency of cleaning and disinfection influences the impact of copper with the greatest reduction in microbial bioburden seen in clinical areas compared to the microbiology laboratory where cleaning/disinfection occurred multiple times daily.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".