Wristbands May Be Home to E. coli, Staph
All wristbands were contaminated, but rubber and plastic wristbands had higher bacterial counts, while metal ones, especially gold and silver, had little to no bacteria.
Common wristbands can be ‘hotbed’ for harmful bacteria including E. coli, staphylococcus, according to new research.
Researchers from Florida Atlantic University’s Charles E. Schmidt College of Science tested wristbands of various textures to determine their risk for harboring potentially harmful pathogenic bacteria.
They tested plastic, rubber, cloth, leather, and metal (gold and silver) wristbands to see if there is a correlation between wristband material and the prevalence of bacteria. They investigated the hygienic state of these various types of wristbands worn by active individuals and identified the best protocols to properly disinfect them.
Using standard microbiological assays, researchers looked at bacterial counts, type of bacteria and their distribution on the wristband surfaces. They also conducted a bacteria susceptibility assay study screening the effectiveness of three different disinfectant solutions: Lysol Disinfectant Spray; 70% ethanol, commonly used in hospitals and alcohol wipes; and apple cider vinegar.
Results of the study, published in the journal Advances in Infectious Diseases, showed that nearly all wristbands (95%) were contaminated. However, rubber and plastic wristbands had higher bacterial counts, while metal ones, especially gold and silver, had little to no bacteria.
“Plastic and rubber wristbands may provide a more appropriate environment for bacterial growth as porous and static surfaces tend to attract and be colonized by bacteria,” sats Nwadiuto Esiobu, Ph.D., senior author and a professor of biological sciences in the Charles E. Schmidt College of Science, in a news release.
The most important predictor of wristband bacteria load was the texture of wristband material and activity (hygiene) of the subject at sampling time. There were no significant differences between males and females in the occurrence or distribution of the bacteria groups.
Bacteria found in the study were common skin residents of the genera Staphylococcus and Pseudomonas, and intestinal organisms of the genera Escherichia, specifically E. coli. Staphylococcus spp was prevalent on 85% of the wristbands; researchers found Pseudomonas spp on 30 % of the wristbands; and they found E. coli bacteria on 60% of the wristbands, which most commonly begins infection through fecal-oral transmission.
The gym-goer showed the highest staphylococcal counts, which emphasizes the necessity of sanitizing wristbands after engaging in rigorous activity at the gym or at home.
“The quantity and taxonomy of bacteria we found on the wristbands show that there is a need for regular sanitation of these surfaces,” says Esiobu. “Even at relatively low numbers these pathogens are of public health significance. Importantly, the ability of many of these bacteria to significantly affect the health of immunocompromised hosts indicates a special need for health care workers and others in hospital environments to regularly sanitize these surfaces.”
Findings from the study showed that Lysol Disinfectant Spray and 70% ethanol were highly effective regardless of the wristband material with 99.99% kill rate within 30 seconds. Apple cider vinegar was not as potent and required a full two-minute exposure to reduce bacterial counts. While these common household disinfectants all proved at least somewhat effective on all materials (rubber, plastic, cloth and metal), antibacterial efficacy was significantly increased at two minutes compared to 30 seconds.
Different disinfectants, depending on their active ingredients, kill bacteria in different ways, such as by disrupting cell membrane integrity, altering or removing proteins or interfering with metabolic activities.
“Other potential forms of bacterial transmission and facilitation of infection, such as earbuds or cell phones, should be similarly studied,” says Esiobu.