Everything for hospitals
Healthy
Healthy
Environment
Everything for hospitals
AIR PURIFI E RS
Hospital Indoor Air Quality
A Patient’s Death Threat
The Hospital acquired infection scenario
Studies on hospital acquired infections began
more than 150 years ago with Ignaz Semmelweis and
Florence Nightingale and contributed to the advance of
microbiologic and prophylactic actions in hospital
enviroments. Despite the increase of asepsis practices,
hospital infections are still considered a public health
concern.
Hospital indoor air, a micro-organism
contamination mean
Many studies show
that bio-aerosols (micro-organism
conglomerates in suspension in
the air) play an important role on
the acquisition of infections being
calculated as responsible for 10
to 20% of those cases.
The pathogens can be
sprayed in many ways, via natural
or forced ventilation system,
water spray, skin scales released
by patients and medical staff,
coughing and sneezing . Studies also show that surgical
staff members can liberate between 1,500 to 50,000
bacteria per minute and those pathogens may stay in
suspension in the air for long periods of time. Studies reveal
that 80 to 90% of all surgical wound infections are related to
bad air quality and that cleaner air translates into in lower
infection risk.
To prevent is better than to remedy
Hospital infections not only result in high financial
cost but also in high number of lost lives. Therefore, better
than the clinical treatment itself, the prevention of hospital
infections is the best strategy as being cheaper and more
effective.
The annual cost of treatment and hospitalization in
England accounts for £1bn. According to the NAO (National
Audit Office) 2000 report, the NHS could have saved £150m if
preventive actions involving hospital hygiene and infection
control had been taken.
Some important pathogens
Staphylococcus
“Staphylococus aureus” is the most common bacteria
in hospital infections across the world and are especially
linked to surgical wound infections that represent 11% of all
nosocomial infections in England.
Other bacterial pathogens have high relevance in
airborne transmitted diseases and are well studied like the
“Streptococcus spp” and “Pseudomonas aeruginosa”.
Airborne pathogens are commonly related to respiratory tract
infections which correspond to 23% of all hospital infections in
England.
Aspergillus
“Aspergillus spp” is the most common fungus
acquired trough air transmission in hospitals.
The “conidius propagulus” small size allows it to be in
suspension in the air for long periods of time, remaining viable
for months, even in low humidity places. Studies estimate that
75% of the Invasive “Aspergillosis” cases result in death,
especially due to the difficulty in diagnosing it. The daily
therapy cost is extremely high over £701, resulting in an
average therapy cost of £ 9.814(*) per patient. The therapy
cost of just one invasive “Aspergillosis” patient is
approximately equivalent to 60 Airfree units
*considering a 70 kg patient. Approximate cost of AWP (of
Lamb) is US$188 per 50 mg vial. Typical dose is 5.0
mg/kg/day. Estimated daily cost per patient US$1,316.
Airfree proven efficiency
Airfree air purifier is proven to drastically reduce
the airborne microbial charge.
In many microbiologic tests in real life conditions
performed by ISO 17025 certified independent laboratories,
Airfree airborne bacterial and fungal charge reduction in the
environment is close to 90%.
Airfree reduces toxic Ozone as well.
The extraordinary efficiency of patented Airfree
technology combines excellent thermo dynamics in
conjunction with the high efficiency of its ceramic core that
captures and incinerates airborne microorganisms at
temperatures around 400 F. In fact, just 105.8F is required
to denaturize a series of thermo-sensitive proteins found in
many cell regions, especially in the nucleus. Independent
tests show that Airfree can reduce up to 96% of the number
of airborne bacteria and fungus in 500 sq ft contaminated
rooms with people working in it.
®
Airfree additional advantages
Destroys micro-organisms regardless of its
virulence and size
Reduces toxic ozone
Totally silent, does not disturb patients
No maintenance required, no toxic filters to replace
No installation required, “plug in” unit
Low purchase and operating cost
It is reasonable to presume that given Airfree extraordinary
airborne bacteria and fungus contamination reduction rate a
wide number of infections could be avoided with the
installation of Airfree.
AirfreeP models
®
Efficient:
by credible ISO 17025 independent laboratories and universities in several
countries.Airfree destroys any microorganism such as mold spores, bacteria,
viruses, and dust mite allergens when passing through its patented high
efficiency thermo dynamic sterilizing ceramic core known as ThermoDyn
regardless of how hazardous and small they might be.
Silent:
Exclusive:
incinerate airborne microorganisms. No fiber glass filters, triclosan coated
paper or any kind of material that can be harmful to
those operating or wasting it.
Ozone Reduction:
ThermoDyn technology is the only
one reducing ozone while
destroying microorganisms.
Economic:
electric consumption is lower
that a 50W light bulb. No
replacement parts required like
filters that may cost hundreds of
dollars a year.
Easy Installation:
Airfree on the floor and plug it into
the nearest electric outlet. No need for
maintenance or special cleaning.
Airfree is tested in real working environments with people in them
No sound emission.
Airfree uses just heat ThermoDyn technology to destroy and
Airfree exclusive
Airfree model
Just place
Bibliographical References
1. Rea E., Upshur R. Semmelweis revisited: the ethics of infection prevention among health care
workers. CMAJ, 2001; 164 (10):1447- 1448.
2. Gallaguer R. Infection control: public health, clinical effectiveness and education.
Br J Nurs., 1999;8(18):1212-14.
3. Pannuti CS, Grinbaum RS. An overview of nosocomial infection control in Brazil. Infect Control Hosp
Epidemiol. 1995 Mar;16(3):170-4.
4. ANVISA. Curso Básico de Controle de Infecção Hospitalar. Brasília, 2000.
5. Hoeffel et al. Controle e prevenção de infecções – custos e economia. Jan., 2005.
http://www.cih.com.br/custos.htm#l1
6. Beggs CB. The airborne transmition of infection hospital buildings: fact or fiction? Indoor and Built
Environment, 2003;12:9-18.
7. Beggs CB. Engineering the control of airborne pathogens. School of Civil Engineering, University of
Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK.
8. Zavascki AP, Cruz RP, Goldani LZ. Risk factors for imipenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa: a
comparative analysis of two case–control studies in hospitalized patients. Journal of Hospital
Infection,2005;59(2):96-101.
9. Sader HS, Gales AC, Pfaller MA, Mendes RE, Zoccoli C, Barth A, Jones RN. Pathogen frequency and
resistance patterns in brazilian hospitals: summary of results from three years of the SENTRY
antimicrobial surveillance program. Braz J Infect Dis vol.5 no.4 Salvador Aug. 2001.
10. Trindade, P. A., McCulloch, J.A., Oliveira, G.A., Mamizuka, E.M. Molecular Techniques for MRSA
Typing: Current Issues and Perspectives. The Brazilian Journal of Infectious Diseases., 2003;7(1):3243
11. Beck-Sague C, Jarvis WR. Secular trends in the epidemiology of nosocomial fungal infections in the
United States. 1980-1990. National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance System. J Infect Dis.
1993;167:1247-1251.
12. Maschmeyer G, Ruhnke M. Update on antifungal treatment of invasive Candida and Aspergillus
infections. Mycoses., 2004;47(7):263-76.
13. Warris A, Voss A, verwij PE., Hospital sources of Aspergillus species: New routes of transmission?
Rev Iberoam Mocol, 2001, 18:156-162.
14. Richardson MD & Ellis M.. Clinical and laboratory diagnosis of systemic fungal infection. Hospital
Medicine, 2000; 61: 610-614.
15. Brochura médica de divulgação medicamento V-Fend da Pfizer - 2004.
16. Lacerda RA. Infecções Hospitalares no Brasil. Tese de Doutorado, USP – Departamento de
Enfermagem, 1995.
17. Starling CE, Couto BR, Pinheiro SM. Applying the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and
National Nosocomial Surveillance system methods in Brazilian hospitals. Am J Infect Control., 1997;
25(4):303-11.
18. Lepock JR. Role of nuclear protein denaturation and aggregation in thermal radiosensitization. Int J
Hyperthermia. 2004 Mar;20(2):115-30.
19. Lepock JR. Cellular effects of hyperthermia: relevance to the minimum dose for thermal damage. Int
J Hyperthermia. 2003 May-Jun;19(3):252-66.
20. Consulta Pública 109 / 2003
See the strawberries 10 day test*:
1st day
Environment
with Airfree
Environment
without Airfree
*test made in two separated closed chambers
Efficiency Test: microorganism reduction
Airfree Switched On Airfree Switched Off
10 days after
Protected against mold
infestation
Completely moldy
Total microorganisms
counting
Test realized by SGS Natec - Germany - Test M00-4990
Independent Laboratory ISO 17025
OctOctOctOctOctSep Sep Sep Sep
See the complete list of test reports at:
www.airfree.com
This guide had Cristiane Minussi’s collaboration, USP biologist professional
responsible for the microbiological nature information.
AIR PURIFI E R S
Loading...