Evaluation of the Efficacy of Some Selected Disinfectants Using the Chick-Martin Test

Nwamaka Igbokwe; Peter Ozoaduche; Oluchi Osuala; Angus Oli

doi:10.26538/tjnpr/v9i10.56

Authors

Nwamaka H. Igbokwe Department of Pharmaceutical Microbiology and Biotechnology, Faculty of Pharmacy, College of Medicine Campus, PMB 12003, Idi-Araba, University of Lagos, Akoka, Lagos, Nigeria
Peter C. Ozoaduche Department of Pharmaceutical Microbiology and Biotechnology, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Agulu, Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka 420108, Anambra State, Nigeria
Oluchi J. Osuala Department of Pharmaceutical Microbiology and Biotechnology, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Agulu, Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka 420108, Anambra State, Nigeria
Angus N. Oli Department of Pharmaceutical Microbiology and Biotechnology, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Agulu, Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka 420108, Anambra State, Nigeria

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.26538/tjnpr/v9i10.56

Keywords:

Disinfectant performance comparison, Cost-effective alternatives, Efficacy evaluation, Chick-Martin phenol coefficient, Disinfectants

Abstract

Disinfectants are vital in infection control as they inactivate or kill harmful germs. Their efficacy, however, is in question, particularly in the presence of organic waste. The aim of the study is the application of the Chick-Martin phenol coefficient test to determine the antimicrobial efficacy of locally manufactured and foreign-made disinfectants from Awka and Onitsha markets, Nigeria. A total of ten (10) disinfectants- (4 foreign and 6 local) were tested for their effectiveness against some microorganisms, including Salmonella spp., Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Staphylococcus aureus. They were compared for their effectiveness as a bactericidal agent with that of phenol using the Chick-Martin test to ascertain their phenol coefficient. The results indicated notable differences in antimicrobial activity. Tetmosol and Septol were most active against Staphylococcus aureus (phenol coefficient = 2), while Dettol and Jik were moderately active (coefficient = 1). Lysol, Dr. Johnson, and Septol were most active against Pseudomonas aeruginosa (coefficient = 8). Against Salmonella spp., Dettol, Dr Johnson, and Jik were most active (coefficient = 8), while Tetmosol and Divitol were poorly active (coefficient = 1). Foreign disinfectants had greater mean Chick-Martin coefficients than local brands in general, indicating their superior efficacy. However, the fact that some local disinfectants, such as Tetmosol and Septol, had performances comparable to foreign brands indicates that they may be efficacious at lower prices. The study highlights the prospects of some local disinfectants (e.g., SEPTOL and TETMOSOL) as effective substitutes for costly foreign brands, advancing affordability without undercutting effectiveness.

References

1.Jaradat AQ, Al-Rawashde FA, Alsarayreh M, Jaradat RQ, Al-Radaideh HY, Khleifat KM. Evaluation of blood coagulation parameters in chronic kidney disease.. Trop. J. Nat. Product Res. 2024; 8(12): 9430–9436

2.Oli AN, Ekejindu CC, Adje DU, Ezeobi I, Ejiofor OS, Ibeh CC, Ubajaka CF. Healthcare waste management in selected government and private hospitals in Southeast Nigeria. Asian Pac.J. of Trop. Biomed., 2016; 6(1): 84-89

3.Alajlan AA, Mukhtar LE, Almussallam AS, Alnuqaydan AM, Albakiri NS, Almutari TF, Alajel SM. Assessment of disinfectant efficacy in reducing microbial growth. PLoS ONE, 2022; 17(6): e0269850

4.Akabueze EE, Obi S, Nwankwo E, Ojoru A. Evaluation of Efficacy of Disinfectants Using Standard Methods in Healthcare Facilities in Kogi State, Northcentral Nigeria. Asian J. of Biomed Pharm. Sci. 2013; 03 (27): 34-38

5.Cheesbrough, M. District laboratory practice in tropical countries (2nd ed, Part 2). Cambridge University Press. 2016

6.Köhler AT, Rodloff AC, Labahn M, Reinhardt M, Truyen U, Speck, S. Evaluation of disinfectant efficacy against multidrug-resistant bacteria: A comprehensive analysis of different methods. American J. Inf. Ctrol, 2019; 47(10):1181-1187

7. Oli AN, Okoli KC, Ujam NT, Adje DU, Ezeobi I. Health professionals' knowledge about the relative prevalence of hospital-acquired infections in the Delta State of Nigeria. Pan Afr. Med.J. 2016b; 24:148

8.Oli AN, Itumo CJ, Okam PC, Ezebialu IU, Okeke KN, Ifezulike CC, Ezeobi I, Emechebe GO, Okezie UM, Adejumo SA, Okoyeh JN. Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae Posing a Dilemma in Effective Healthcare Delivery Antibiotics (Basel). 2019; 8(4):156

9.Environmental Protection Agency OSCPP 8102200: Disinfectants for use on hard surfaces-efficacy data recommendations, 2017 https://wwwregulationsgov/document?D=EPA-HQ-OPPT-2009-0150-0002; 2012

10.Peters A, Borzykowski T, Tartari E, Kilpatrick C, Mai SHC, Allegranzi B, Pittet D. Clean Care for All-It’s in Your Hands”: The 5th of May 2019 World Health Organisation SAVE LIVES: Clean Your Hands Campaign. J Infect Dis, 2019; 8, 1–3

11.West AM, Teska PJ, Lineback CB, Oliver HF. Strain, disinfectant, concentration, and contact time quantitatively impact disinfectant efficacy. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control, 2018; 7, 49 https://doiorg/101186/s13756-018-0340-2

12.Butucel E, Balta I, Ahmadi M, Dumitrescu G, Morairu F, Pet I, Corcionivoschi N. Biocides as biomedicines against foodborne pathogenic bacteria. Biomedicines, 2022; 10(2):379

13.Mohammad, GA. Evaluation of Some Common Disinfectants against Some Gram-Negative Bacteria. Inter. J. of Drug Del.Tech, 2020; 10(1): 102-107

14.Köhler AT, Rodloff AC, Labahn M, Reinhardt M, Truyen U, Speck S. Efficacy of sodium hypochlorite against multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria. J. Hosp. Infec., 2018; 100(3):e40-e46

15.Nimer NA. Nosocomial Infection and Antibiotic-Resistant Threat in the Middle East. Infect Drug Resist, 2022; 15, 631–639

16.Alahdal HM, AlYahya S, Ameen F, Sonbol H, Alomary MN. A review on Saudi Arabian wastewater treatment facilities

and available disinfection methods: Implications to SARS-CoV-2 control. J King Saud Univ-Sci, 2021; 33, 101574

17.Mohieldin A, Elbssir K, Nourain H, Sidg N. Efficacy assessment for disinfection process in Buraidah Maternity Hospital–Saudi Arabia. Ann Med Biomed Sci, 2018; 4, 11–13

18.Reichel M, Schlicht A, Ostermeyer C, Kampf G. Efficacy of surface disinfectant cleaners against emerging highly resistant gram-negative bacteria. BMC Infectious Diseases, 2014; 14:292

19.Sangwan J, Lohan K, Lathwal S, Mane P. Evaluation and Comparison of Microbicidal Activity of Commonly Used Disinfectants: A Laboratory-Based Study. National J. Lab Med, 2020; 9:5-8

20.Fadeyibi M, Sawyerr OH, Opasola AO, Ishola OA. Comparative evaluation of disinfectant effectiveness on clinical. Afr. J. Health, Saf. Environ, 2024; 5(2): 57-65

21.Chima IU, Uchegbu IC, Okoli IC, Ezema C, Wehke SN. Evaluation of the efficiency of disinfectants used against bacterial isolates from intensive poultry farming environments in Imo State. Nig. J.Bio Sci. 2013; 13(5): 349-536

22.Singh H, Singh P, Sharma A. To Check the Efficacy of Different Disinfectants by the Kelsey Sykes Method. BIO Web of Conferences, 2024; 86: 01052

23.Haruta A, Kawada-Matsuo M, Le MN, Yoshikawa M, Kajihara T, Yahara K, Kitamura N, Kutsuno S, Arai C, Takeuchi M, Sugawara Y, Hisatsune J, Tsuga K, Ohge H, Sugai M. Komatsuzawa H. Disinfectant Susceptibility of Third-Generation-Cephalosporin/Carbapenem-Resistant Gram-Negative Bacteria Isolated from the Oral Cavity of Residents of Long-Term-Care Facilities. App.Environ. Microbio. 2023; 89(1): e0171222

24.Aminu AI, Abdullahi MS. Evaluation of the Antibacterial Effectiveness of Some Antiseptics and Disinfectants. UMYU J. Microbio. Res., 2021; 6(1), 175–181

25.Jalal NA, Ashgar SS, Faidah H, Johargy AK, Momenah AM, Barhameen AA, Hariri SH, Bantun F, Qashqari FS, Khidir EB, Althagafi MH Comparative Assessment of Antimicrobial Efficacy of Seven Surface Disinfectants against Eight Bacterial Strains in Saudi Arabia: An In Vitro Study. Microbiol. Res. 2023; 14(3), 819-830