Evaluation of the potential for virus dispersal during hand drying: a comparison of three methods

Aims To use a MS2 bacteriophage model to compare three hand-drying methods, paper towels (PT), a warm air dryer (WAD) and a jet air dryer (JAD), for their potential to disperse viruses and contaminate the immediate environment during use. Methods and Results Participants washed their gloved hands with a suspension of MS2 bacteriophage and hands were dried with one of the three hand-drying devices. The quantity of MS2 present in the areas around each device was determined using a plaque assay. Samples were collected from plates containing the indicator strain, placed at varying heights and distances and also from the air. Over a height range of 0.15-1.65 m, the JAD dispersed an average of >60 and >1300-fold more plaque-forming units (pfu) compared to the WAD and PT (P <0.0001), respectively. The JAD dispersed an average of >20 and >190-fold more pfu in total compared to WAD and PT at all distances tested up to 3 m (P <0.01), respectively. Air samples collected around each device 15 minutes after use indicated that the JAD dispersed an average of >50 and >100-fold more pfu compared to the WAD and PT (P <0.001), respectively. Conclusions Use of the JAD lead to significantly greater and further dispersal of MS2 bacteriophage from artificially contaminated hands when compared to the WAD and PT. Significance and Impact of Study The choice of hand drying device should be considered carefully in areas where infection prevention concerns are paramount, such as healthcare settings and the food industry.

Longitudinal evaluation of quality of life in 288 patients with Neurofibromatosis 2

Advances in molecular biology have resulted in novel therapy for neurofibromatosis 2-related (NF2) tumours, highlighting the need for robust outcome measures. The disease-focused NF2 impact on quality of life (NFTI-QOL) patient questionnaire was assessed as an outcome measure for treatment in a multi-centre study. NFTI-QOL was related to clinician-rated severity (ClinSev) and genetic severity (GenSev) over repeated visits. Data were evaluated for 288 NF2 patients (n = 464 visits) attending the English national NF2 clinics from 2010 to 2012. The male-to-female ratio was equal and the mean age was 42.2 (SD 17.8) years. The analysis included NFTI-QOL eight-item score, ClinSev graded as mild, moderate, or severe, and GenSev as a rank order of the number of NF2 mutations (graded as mild, moderate, severe). The mean (SD) 8.7 (5.4) score for NFTI-QOL for either a first visit or all visits 9.2 (5.4) was similar to the published norm of 9.4 (5.5), with no significant relationships with age or gender. NFTI-QOL internal reliability was good, with a Cronbach’s alpha score of 0.85 and test re-test reliability r = 0.84. NFTI related to ClinSev (r = 0.41, p < 0.001; r = 0.46 for all visits), but weakly to GenSev (r = 0.16, p < 0.05; r = 0.15 for all visits). ClinSev related to GenSev (r = 0.41, p < 0.001; r = 0.42 for all visits). NFTI-QOL showed a good reliability and ability to detect significant longitudinal changes in the QOL of individuals. The moderate relationships of NFTI-QOL with clinician- and genetic-rated severity suggest that NFTI-QOL taps into NF2 patient experiences that are not encompassed by ClinSev rating or genotype.

Place-Based Evaluation for Infrastructure and Spatial Projects: An Introduction

This book brings together experts in the fields of spatial planning, landuse and infrastructure management to explore the emerging agenda of spatially-oriented integrated evaluation. It weaves together the latest theories, case studies, methods, policy and practice to examine and assess the values, impacts, benefits and the overall success in integrated land-use management. In doing so, the book clarifies the nature and roles of evaluation and puts forward guidance for future policy and practice.

Final Evaluation of the Heart of Teesdale Landscape Partnership

A report on behalf of Durham County Council to the Heritage Lottery Funded in relation to the £2.7m Heart of Teesdale Landscape Partnership. The evaluation provides an independent assessment of what the Partnership has delivered (its outputs), what the benefits (outcomes) have been and what lasting impact it will have made (its legacy) for natural and cultural heritage and for local communities and visitors. This Report also considers what may not have worked so well and the lessons that may be drawn for the future.