Observational study found high bacterial load in emergency ambulances, indicating vital disinfection needs.
Background Emergency ambulances are vital in prehospital care but carry a high risk of healthcare-associated infections due to confined spaces, high patient turnover, and brief cleaning intervals. Routine disinfection protocols are in place; however, their effectiveness in South Korean ambulances has not been formally evaluated. Methods This pre–post observational study examined bacterial contamination on six high-touch surfaces across five operational ambulances in Province G, South Korea. Swabs were collected immediately before and after daily disinfection performed by paramedics. Bacterial load was quantified using colony-forming units (CFUs), and species identification was conducted via 16 S rRNA sequencing. Statistical analyses included paired t-tests, ANOVA, Cohen’s d, and MANOVA to evaluate the cleaning efficacy and contamination patterns. Results All six surfaces were contaminated before cleaning, with the highest CFUs recorded on the ventilation outlet (182.6 ± 48.3), SpO₂ sensor (145.2 ± 35.7), and stretcher handle (122.4 ± 22.6). Disinfection significantly reduced bacterial load across all surfaces ( p < 0.05), yet residual contamination remained on the SpO₂ sensor (Bacillus velezensis) and stretcher handle (Williamsia muralis). ANOVA revealed significant differences in baseline contamination (F(5,24) = 78.52, p < 0.001), and MANOVA confirmed that cleaning effectiveness varied by surface geometry (Wilks’ Λ = 0.202, p < 0.001). Conclusions Manual disinfection significantly lowers bacterial load in ambulances, but residual contamination on complex, high-touch surfaces remains problematic. These findings underscore the need for multimodal disinfection approaches, improved equipment design, and systematic microbial surveillance to enhance EMS infection control standards.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nam et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: