• At least 5,000 patients die of complications due to infections they acquired  in hospitals each year.
• 9% of patients in UK hospitals pick up an infection that they did not have before they arrived.
• A hand contaminated with Influenza A virus will contaminate the next 7 surfaces it touches.

These terrifying facts summarise the prolific danger that hospital-acquired infections pose to the NHS and to their patients.  Every year, the NHS spends roughly one billion pounds in an attempt to clean hospitals, in order tp defeat these infections and lower the mortality rate they cause.  Many of these hospital-spread infections have become household names, including MRSA, E. coli, klebsiella pneumoniae which causes pneumonia and clostridium difficile which causes tetanus.  In more recent years, bird flu and swine flu have also threatened to infect British hospitals.

In recent years, evidence has been found that offers some hope; hospitals can stop the spread of these germs and infections through the use of  copper.

Roughly 80% of all infectious diseases are spread by touch; the contact of one surface with another.   In hospitals, certain surfaces are touched hundreds of times a day; push plates, door handles, bed rails, light switches, table tops and counters, dressing trolleys and soap, alcohol and paper towel dispensers are all heavily responsible for the spread of infection.  Research has proven that if these surfaces are replaced by copper, or high-copper alloys like brass, the spread of infectious germs in hospitals can be dramatically reduced.

Why it works
Copper prevents the spread of infectious germs because it is a natural antimicrobial; something which can kill or deactivate microbes.  The microbes that make up the harmful bacteria present on many hospital surfaces can stay alive and active for hours, days or even months if untreated.  If this surface is then touched, the active bacteria can spread, creating the potential for infection.  The antimicrobial quality of copper means that when the same dangerous bacteria lands on its surface, it cannot survive; a copper surfaces kills more than 99.9% of the bacteria that lands on it within two hours, and kills over 99% after repeated contamination.  Copper is proven to deactivate microbes which cause the most dangerous hospital-acquired infections, listed earlier, which once done will reduce their spread throughout the hospital.

Tried and tested
Using copper to fight against the spread of infection was first tested in laboratory research at the University of Southampton, where they tested MRSA’s survival rate on different surfaces.  The results showed that after just 90 minutes on copper, the MRSA bacteria was deactivated; a stark contrast to stainless steel, used in many hospitals, where the bacteria was unaffected.  A  clinical trial then followed in Selly Oak Hospital in Birmingham, which discovered that replacing hospital surfaces that get touched every day with copper could reduce hospital-acquired infections by 90-100%.

The tried and tested concept has now started to work its way into hospitals.  St Francis Private Hospital in  County Westmeath in Ireland pioneered the idea, and was the first hospital in the world to change frequently-touched surfaces to copper-based substances.  The concept soon spread and in January 2011, French care home Centre Inter Générationnel Multi Accueil became the first in France to use copper in this way.

There is every argument for hospitals and care homes to replace regularly-touched surfaces with copper and high-copper alloys, as a preventative measure against the spread of disease.  Once installed, the copper fixtures will  quickly and endlessly kill dangerous bacteria, which will without a doubt reduce the spread of infection.  The cost of replacing he surfaces with copper may seem off-putting, but when the battle against hospital-spread infections is costing the NHS a billion pounds each year, this one-off payment is something worth investing in.

Many people especially older ones susceptible to flu and other winter ailments have got into the habit of having a seasonal flu jab as we enter autumn.

Millions of people are regularly vaccinated including the long term sick, people in susceptible job roles and even pregnant women.

This year’s campaign is now under way with a tripartite action against the major virus strains identified as being the most threat this year.

Last years potential swine flu pandemic led to the production of tens of millions of H1N1 doses of vaccines. Whilst most stocks were not used in this country many millions were administered worldwide without any major reported safety issues.

Some patients though refused the H1N1 vaccine last year following concerns about its speed of production as the government geared up for a full scale pandemic and also it’s perceived lack of extensive testing.

This year’s seasonal flu jab contains the vaccine against swine flu as it is one of the three flu strains being targeted. This does not mean that there is the same level of concern about a pandemic of swine flu but simply that major flu viruses often develop into seasonal strains in the years following major outbreaks.

The concern though is that those people who refused the single dose swine flu vaccine last year, for whatever perceived concerns, will now be vaccinated with it unknowingly. That is unless their doctor takes valuable surgery time to help them make an informed decision.

A new electric filter has been designed to reduce the spread of viruses and provide enhanced norovirus  and swine flu protection. The filter is specifically designed to be fitted onboard commercial aircraft in an effort to reduce the international spread of these highly contagious viruses.

According to the systems designers it is able to destroy around 99.9 per cent of known infectious diseases onboard an aircraft. The swine flu filtering system has been designed and constructed by the aerospace giant BAE Systems, alongside a smaller firm, Quest International.

The swine flu protection system is know as “AirManager” and relies upon an electrical field to destroy germs and other pollutant particles circulating in the air. This is quite unlike a conventional air filtration system which seeks solely to remove the particles from the air.

Alongside its ability to destroy swine flu and the norovirus the system is also proven to reduce the spread of dreaded “superbugs” like MRSA and C.difficile. Due to this it is also being considered for use by the NHS in an attempt to reduce the spread of these killer “superbugs” and enhance the current standards of hospital cleaning.

The swine flu filter is especially effective onboard aircraft as the air inside the cabin can be recirculated up to 30 times in a single hour. This could lead to passengers being exposed to infected air numerous times on a flight. Introduction of the swine flu filters may also put an end to the practice of pre-take off disinfectant spraying on long haul flights.

The swine flu filtration system was recently tested onboard numerous aircraft including a Boeing 757. After these successful tests one airline has already placed a firm order. One downside to the filters is their price tag. At £10,000 the price tag may not seem that steep when compared to the operating costs of an aircraft, however a large aircraft would require up to eight swine flu air filtration systems to deal with the volume of air inside the cabin. Regardless of this it is clear that these swine flu protection filters are a break through in the battle against infectious diseases.

As the winter flu season looms ever closer demand for swine flu hand sanitizers is rocketing but is our faith in these alcohol based solutions misplaced?

It is common knowledge that good hygiene can prevent the transmission of infectious diseases such as swine flu. This is backed up by the International Scientific Forum on Home Hygiene (IFH). Hands play an integral role in transmitting a virus as they regularly come into contact with known portals of entry for pathogens. These include the obvious ones such as the nose and mouth, alongside the less obvious, such as the conjunctiva of the eyes.

It follows on from this that good hand hygiene leads to a reduction in the transmission of viruses. This is where hand sanitizers come in. Even though nothing really beats good old hand washing a hand sanitizer can prove a useful ally in the battle against swine flu. Although no hand sanitizer is proven to prevent swine flu, according to the Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) they do undoubtedly help protect you and your family from the H1N1 virus by limiting its potential for transmission.

Research has shown that unlike many methods of combating a virus, alcohol based swine flu hand sanitizers do not lead to viral adaption and the formation of a resistant strain. This is good news for the health conscious among you as it guarantees the effectiveness of swine flu hand sanitizers regardless of the form the virus takes. If the hand gel is used properly and applied to the entire hand for at least 20 seconds it provides a good alternative to hand washing. Swine flu hand sanitizing gel can be especially convenient if you are on the go and hand washing facilities are not readily available.

The high street retailer WH Smith has recently been condemned for their abandonment of professional contract cleaners. The company has disregarded these professional contract cleaners in favour of their own retail staff despite the swine flu pandemic. Smiths have delegated cleaning to every day staff as part of their general duties, a move that has been condemned by the British Cleaning Council (BCC) as well as the Cleaning and Support Services Association (CSSA).

In an attempt to cut costs the high street chain has slashed the use of professional contract cleaners to once a week in some of its stores. This has left staff in the lurch as they are now required to sweep floors and carry out general cleaning in store.

Regardless of opposition from staff and cleaning firms currently under contract with WH Smith, the retailer’s chief executive Kate Swann pressed ahead with the policy. This decision was criticised by Andrew Large when he spoke on behalf of the BCC and CSSA. He described the measures as potentially unlawful before going on to criticise them as damaging to good hygiene at a time when this was increasingly important. Large also promised to investigate if professional contract cleaners were made redundant when they should have remained under the employment of WH Smith.

Mr Large criticised the high street giant’s actions claiming that “WH Smith is depriving itself of skills and expertise of cleaning professionals.” He went on to say that there is “no guarantee that the shop workers will have the necessary skills or training to be able to maintain the stores to a satisfactory standard.”

It is clear that if an organisation wishes to maintain proper infection control practices then the best option is to employ professional contract cleaners with all of the necessary expertise. It is only by doing this that a company can be sure that all the necessary measures are being taken to combat the transmission of the swine flu virus, ideally through the use of  swine flu sanitizer, wipes and hard surface cleaners. With thousands of customers browsing through the retailer’s magazines on a daily basis, it is both irresponsible and potentially dangerous for WH Smith to cut back on professional contract cleaners at this time.