English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Worldwide epidemiological reports assert that drinking water is a source for infections and Legionella control represents a critical issue in healthcare settings. Chemical disinfections of water networks are control measures that need to be fine-tuned to obtain satisfactory results in large buildings over prolonged time periods. Aim of study is the evaluation of the effect of anolyte and chlorine dioxide, applied in two different hot water networks of a nursing home to manage Legionella risk. Nursing home has two buildings (A and B), with the same point of aqueduct water entrance. From June 2016, following a shock chlorination, the continuous disinfections with chlorine dioxide and anolyte were applied in hot networks of building A and B, respectively. Hot water was sampled at the central heating system and at two points of use for Legionella research, while chemical tests of manganese (Mn), iron (Fe), zinc (Zn) and trihalomethanes compounds (THM) were implemented to evaluate the disinfection by-products presence. Before chlorination Legionella pneumophila sg1 was recovered with a mean count of 2.4 × 104 CFU/L, while chemical compounds concentrations were within the law limits (Directive 98/83/EC). Then the disinfections Legionella was not recovered in both hot water plants. After the disinfection with chlorine dioxide (from June 2016 to May 2018), a statistically significant increase of iron, zinc and THM concentrations was detected in building A (p = 0.012; p = 0.004; p = 0.008). Both disinfectants appear effective against Legionella spp. growth in water network, but anolyte ensures a lower disinfection by-products release.

Comparison of Anolyte and Chlorine Dioxide for a Continuous Hot Water Disinfection in Nursing Home: A Two Years Legionnaires’ Disease Prevention