Determining the Efficacy of Liquid Sporicides Against Spores of Bacillus subtilis on a Hard Nonporous Surface Using the Quantitative Three Step Method: Collaborative Study

A collaborative study was conducted to validate the quantitative Three Step Method (TSM), a method designed to measure the performance of liquid sporicides on a hard nonporous surface. Ten laboratories agreed to participate in the collaborative study; data from 8 of 10 participating laboratories were used in the final statistical analysis. The TSM uses 5 5 1 mm glass coupons (carriers) upon which spores have been inoculated and which are introduced into liquid sporicidal agent contained in a microcentrifuge tube. Following exposure to a test chemical and a neutralization agent, spores are removed from carriers in 3 fractions: passive removal (Fraction A), sonication (Fraction B), and gentle agitation (Fraction C). Liquid from each fraction is serially diluted and plated on a recovery medium for spore enumeration. Control counts are compared to the treated counts, and the level of efficacy is determined by calculating the log10 reduction (LR) of spores. The main statistical goals were to evaluate the repeatability and reproducibility of the LR values, to estimate the components of variance for LR, and to assess method responsiveness. AOAC Method 966.04Method II was used as a reference method. The scope of the validation was limited to testing liquid formulations against spores of Bacillus subtilis, a surrogate for virulent strains of B. anthracis, on a hard nonporous surface (glass). The test chemicals used in the study were sodium hypochlorite, a combination of peracetic acid and hydrogen peroxide, and glutaraldehyde. Each test chemical was evaluated at 3 levels of presumed efficacy: high, medium, and low. Three replications were required. The TSM was validated as it successfully met the statistical parameters for quantitative test methods. Satisfactory validation parameters, such as the repeatability standard deviation (Sr) and reproducibility standard deviation (SR), were obtained for control carrier counts and LR values. Both the TSM and the reference method were responsive to the efficacy levels of the test chemicals. For the 72 total TSM tests conducted, the mean ( standard error of the mean) log density of spores per control carrier was 6.86 ( 0.08); the Sr and SR were low at 0.15 and 0.27, respectively. Across the range of test chemicals, the Sr and SR estimates associated with LR were also acceptably low. The Sr rangedfrom 0.17 to 0.72 and the SR ranged from 0.34 to 1.43. Overall, the Sr and SR estimates associated with the efficacy data were within the ranges published for other quantitative methods and meet the performance characteristics necessary for validation.

Comparative Evaluation of Two Quantitative Test Methods for Determining the Efficacy of Liquid Sporicides and Sterilants on a Hard Surface: A Precollaborative Study

Two quantitative carrier-based test methods for determining the efficacy of liquid sporicides and sterilants on a hard surface, the Standard Quantitative Carrier Test MethodASTM E 2111-00 and an adaptation of a quantitative micro-method as reported by Sagripanti and Bonifacino, were compared in this study. The methods were selected based on their desirable characteristics (e.g., well-developed protocol, previous use with spores, fully quantitative, and use of readily available equipment) for testing liquid sporicides and sterilants on a hard surface. In this paper, the Sagripanti-Bonifacino procedure is referred to as the Three Step Method (TSM). AOAC Official Method 966.04 was included in this study as a reference method. Three laboratories participated in the evaluation. Three chemical treatments were tested: (1) 3000 ppm sodium hypochlorite with pH adjusted to 7.0, (2) a hydrogen peroxide/peroxyacetic acid product, and (3) 3000 ppm sodium hypochlorite with pH unadjusted (pH of approximately 10.0). A fourth treatment, 6000 ppm sodium hypochlorite solution with pH adjusted to 7.0, was included only for Method 966.04 as a positive control (high level of efficacy). The contact time was 10 min for all chemical treatments except the 6000 ppm sodium hypochlorite treatment which was tested at 30 min. Each chemical treatment was tested 3 times using each of the methods. Only 2 of the laboratories performed the AOAC method. Method performance was assessed by the within-laboratory variance, between-laboratory variance, and total variance associated with the log reduction (LR) estimates generated by each quantitative method. The quantitative methods performed similarly, and the LR values generated by each method were not statistically different for the 3 treatments evaluated. Based on feedback from the participating laboratories, compared to the TSM, ASTM E 2111-00 was more resource demanding and required more set-up time. The logistical and resource concerns identified for ASTM E 2111-00 were largely associated with the filtration process and counting bacterial colonies on filters. Thus, the TSM was determined to be the most suitable method.

Modification to the AOAC Sporicidal Activity of Disinfectants Test (Method 966.04): Collaborative Study

In an effort to improve AOAC Method 966.04, the Sporicidal Activity of Disinfectants Test, selected modifications to the procedure were evaluated in a collaborative study. Method 966.04 is used to generate efficacy data to support the product registration of sporicides and sterilants. The method is a carrier-based test that provides a qualitative measure of product efficacy against spores of Bacillus subtilis and Clostridium sporogenes. The use of garden soil extract and the lack of standard procedures for the enumeration of spores and neutralization of the test chemicals have been considered problematic for many years. The proposed modifications were limited to the B. subtilis and hard surface carrier (porcelain penicylinder) components of the method. The study included the evaluation of a replacement for soil extract nutrient broth and an establishment of a minimum spore titer per carrier, both considered crucial for the improvement and utilization of the method. Additionally, an alternative hard surface material and a neutralization confirmation procedure were evaluated. To determine the equivalence of the proposed alternatives to the standard method, 3 medium/carrier combinations, (1) soil extract nutrient broth/porcelain carrier (current method), (2) nutrient agar amended with 5 g/mL manganese sulfate/porcelain carrier, and (3) nutrient agar amended with 5 g/mL manganese sulfate/stainless steel carrier were analyzed for carrier counts, HCl resistance, efficacy, quantitative efficacy, and spore wash-off. The test chemicals used in the study represent 3 chemical classes and are commercially available antimicrobial liquid products: sodium hypochlorite (bleach), glutaraldehyde, and a combination of peracetic acid and hydrogen peroxide. Four laboratories participated in the study. The results of the spore titer per carrier, HCl resistance, efficacy, and wash-off studies demonstrate that amended nutrient agar in conjunction with the porcelain is comparable to the current method, soil extract nutrient broth/porcelain. The nutrient agar method is simple, inexpensive, reproducible, and provides an ample supply of high quality spores. Due to the current use of porcelain carriers for testing C. sporogenes, it is advisable to retain the use of porcelain carriers until stainless steel can be evaluated as a replacement carrier material for Clostridium. The evaluation of stainless steel for Clostridium has been initiated by the Study Director. Study Director recommendations for First Action revisions are provided in a modified method.

Evaluation of the VIDAS® Listeria (LIS) Immunoassay for the Detection of Listeria in Foods Using Demi-Fraser and Fraser Enrichment Broths, as Modification of AOAC Official Method 999.06 (AOAC Official Method 2004.06)

A multilaboratory study was conducted to compare the VIDAS® LIS immunoassay with the standard cultural methods for the detection of Listeria in foods using an enrichment modification of AOAC Official Method 999.06. The modified enrichment protocol was implemented to harmonize the VIDAS LIS assay with the VIDAS LMO2 assay. Five food types—brie cheese, vanilla ice cream, frozen green beans, frozen raw tilapia fish, and cooked roast beef—at 3 inoculation levels, were analyzed by each method. A total of 15 laboratories representing government and industry participated. In this study, 1206 test portions were tested, of which 1170 were used in the statistical analysis. There were 433 positive by the VIDAS LIS assay and 396 positive by the standard culture methods. A Chi-square analysis of each of the 5 food types, at the 3 inoculation levels tested, was performed. The resulting average Chi square analysis, 0.42, indicated that, overall, there are no statistical differences between the VIDAS LIS assay and the standard methods at the 5% level of significance.

Evaluation of the VIDAS Listeria (LIS) immunoassay for the detection of Listeria in foods using demi-Fraser and Fraser enrichment broths, as modification of AOAC Official Method 999.06 (AOAC Official Method 2004.06)

A multilaboratory study was conducted to compare the VIDAS LIS immunoassay with the standard cultural methods for the detection of Listeria in foods using an enrichment modification of AOAC Official Method 999.06. The modified enrichment protocol was implemented to harmonize the VIDAS LIS assay with the VIDAS LMO2 assay. Five food types--brie cheese, vanilla ice cream, frozen green beans, frozen raw tilapia fish, and cooked roast beef--at 3 inoculation levels, were analyzed by each method. A total of 15 laboratories representing government and industry participated. In this study, 1206 test portions were tested, of which 1170 were used in the statistical analysis. There were 433 positive by the VIDAS LIS assay and 396 positive by the standard culture methods. A Chi-square analysis of each of the 5 food types, at the 3 inoculation levels tested, was performed. The resulting average Chi square analysis, 0.42, indicated that, overall, there are no statistical differences between the VIDAS LIS assay and the standard methods at the 5% level of significance.