Surface sampling methods for Bacillus anthracis spore contamination

Wayne T. Sanderson; Misty J. Hein; Lauralynn Taylor; Brian D. Curwin; Gregory M. Kinnes; Teresa A. Seitz; Tanja Popovic; Harvey T. Holmes; Molly E. Kellum; Sigrid K. McAllister; David N. Whaley; Edward A. Tupin; Timothy Walker; Jennifer A. Freed; Dorothy S. Small; Brian Klusaritz; John H. Bridges

doi:10.3201/eid0810.020382

Surface sampling methods for Bacillus anthracis spore contamination

Wayne T. Sanderson, Misty J. Hein, Lauralynn Taylor, Brian D. Curwin, Gregory M. Kinnes, Teresa A. Seitz, Tanja Popovic, Harvey T. Holmes, Molly E. Kellum, Sigrid K. McAllister, David N. Whaley, Edward A. Tupin, Timothy Walker, Jennifer A. Freed, Dorothy S. Small, Brian Klusaritz, John H. Bridges

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

75 Scopus citations

Abstract

During an investigation conducted December 17-20, 2001, we collected environmental samples from a U.S. postal facility in Washington, D.C., known to be extensively contaminated with Bacillus anthracis spores. Because methods for collecting and analyzing B. anthracis spores have not yet been validated, our objective was to compare the relative effectiveness of sampling methods used for collecting spores from contaminated surfaces. Comparison of wipe, wet and dry swab, and HEPA vacuum sock samples on nonporous surfaces indicated good agreement between results with HEPA vacuum and wipe samples. However, results from HEPA vacuum sock and wipe samples agreed poorly with the swab samples. Dry swabs failed to detect spores >75% of the time when they were detected by wipe and HEPA vacuum samples. Wipe samples collected after HEPA vacuum samples and HEPA vacuum samples collected after wipe samples indicated that neither method completely removed spores from the sampled surfaces.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	1145-1151
Number of pages	7
Journal	Emerging Infectious Diseases
Volume	8
Issue number	10
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.3201/eid0810.020382
State	Published - Oct 1 2002

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Epidemiology
Microbiology (medical)
Infectious Diseases

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.3201/eid0810.020382

Cite this

Sanderson, W. T., Hein, M. J., Taylor, L., Curwin, B. D., Kinnes, G. M., Seitz, T. A., Popovic, T., Holmes, H. T., Kellum, M. E., McAllister, S. K., Whaley, D. N., Tupin, E. A., Walker, T., Freed, J. A., Small, D. S., Klusaritz, B., & Bridges, J. H. (2002). Surface sampling methods for Bacillus anthracis spore contamination. Emerging Infectious Diseases, 8(10), 1145-1151. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid0810.020382

@article{bae1a8d06946403a9cfc914e3769f44f,

title = "Surface sampling methods for Bacillus anthracis spore contamination",

abstract = "During an investigation conducted December 17-20, 2001, we collected environmental samples from a U.S. postal facility in Washington, D.C., known to be extensively contaminated with Bacillus anthracis spores. Because methods for collecting and analyzing B. anthracis spores have not yet been validated, our objective was to compare the relative effectiveness of sampling methods used for collecting spores from contaminated surfaces. Comparison of wipe, wet and dry swab, and HEPA vacuum sock samples on nonporous surfaces indicated good agreement between results with HEPA vacuum and wipe samples. However, results from HEPA vacuum sock and wipe samples agreed poorly with the swab samples. Dry swabs failed to detect spores >75% of the time when they were detected by wipe and HEPA vacuum samples. Wipe samples collected after HEPA vacuum samples and HEPA vacuum samples collected after wipe samples indicated that neither method completely removed spores from the sampled surfaces.",

author = "Sanderson, {Wayne T.} and Hein, {Misty J.} and Lauralynn Taylor and Curwin, {Brian D.} and Kinnes, {Gregory M.} and Seitz, {Teresa A.} and Tanja Popovic and Holmes, {Harvey T.} and Kellum, {Molly E.} and McAllister, {Sigrid K.} and Whaley, {David N.} and Tupin, {Edward A.} and Timothy Walker and Freed, {Jennifer A.} and Small, {Dorothy S.} and Brian Klusaritz and Bridges, {John H.}",

year = "2002",

month = oct,

day = "1",

doi = "10.3201/eid0810.020382",

language = "English",

volume = "8",

pages = "1145--1151",

number = "10",

}

Sanderson, WT, Hein, MJ, Taylor, L, Curwin, BD, Kinnes, GM, Seitz, TA, Popovic, T, Holmes, HT, Kellum, ME, McAllister, SK, Whaley, DN, Tupin, EA, Walker, T, Freed, JA, Small, DS, Klusaritz, B & Bridges, JH 2002, 'Surface sampling methods for Bacillus anthracis spore contamination', Emerging Infectious Diseases, vol. 8, no. 10, pp. 1145-1151. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid0810.020382

TY - JOUR

T1 - Surface sampling methods for Bacillus anthracis spore contamination

AU - Sanderson, Wayne T.

AU - Hein, Misty J.

AU - Taylor, Lauralynn

AU - Curwin, Brian D.

AU - Kinnes, Gregory M.

AU - Seitz, Teresa A.

AU - Popovic, Tanja

AU - Holmes, Harvey T.

AU - Kellum, Molly E.

AU - McAllister, Sigrid K.

AU - Whaley, David N.

AU - Tupin, Edward A.

AU - Walker, Timothy

AU - Freed, Jennifer A.

AU - Small, Dorothy S.

AU - Klusaritz, Brian

AU - Bridges, John H.

PY - 2002/10/1

Y1 - 2002/10/1

N2 - During an investigation conducted December 17-20, 2001, we collected environmental samples from a U.S. postal facility in Washington, D.C., known to be extensively contaminated with Bacillus anthracis spores. Because methods for collecting and analyzing B. anthracis spores have not yet been validated, our objective was to compare the relative effectiveness of sampling methods used for collecting spores from contaminated surfaces. Comparison of wipe, wet and dry swab, and HEPA vacuum sock samples on nonporous surfaces indicated good agreement between results with HEPA vacuum and wipe samples. However, results from HEPA vacuum sock and wipe samples agreed poorly with the swab samples. Dry swabs failed to detect spores >75% of the time when they were detected by wipe and HEPA vacuum samples. Wipe samples collected after HEPA vacuum samples and HEPA vacuum samples collected after wipe samples indicated that neither method completely removed spores from the sampled surfaces.

AB - During an investigation conducted December 17-20, 2001, we collected environmental samples from a U.S. postal facility in Washington, D.C., known to be extensively contaminated with Bacillus anthracis spores. Because methods for collecting and analyzing B. anthracis spores have not yet been validated, our objective was to compare the relative effectiveness of sampling methods used for collecting spores from contaminated surfaces. Comparison of wipe, wet and dry swab, and HEPA vacuum sock samples on nonporous surfaces indicated good agreement between results with HEPA vacuum and wipe samples. However, results from HEPA vacuum sock and wipe samples agreed poorly with the swab samples. Dry swabs failed to detect spores >75% of the time when they were detected by wipe and HEPA vacuum samples. Wipe samples collected after HEPA vacuum samples and HEPA vacuum samples collected after wipe samples indicated that neither method completely removed spores from the sampled surfaces.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0036774074&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0036774074&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3201/eid0810.020382

DO - 10.3201/eid0810.020382

M3 - Article

C2 - 12396930

AN - SCOPUS:0036774074

SN - 1080-6040

VL - 8

SP - 1145

EP - 1151

JO - Emerging Infectious Diseases

JF - Emerging Infectious Diseases

IS - 10

ER -

Surface sampling methods for Bacillus anthracis spore contamination

Abstract

ASJC Scopus subject areas

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this