3D-printed material — used by some hospitals for PPE — is ‘readily contaminated’
Click Here to Manage Email Alerts
Key takeaways:
- The most common 3D printing materials used for PPE in hospitals leave “nooks and crannies” where bacteria may contaminate.
- Limiting 3D-printed PPE to a single use could curtail spread of pathogens.
SEATTLE — Personal protective equipment and other supplies made using 3D printers may be “readily contaminated” with nosocomial pathogens and are best for one-time use, researchers reported.
According to a study presented at the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America Spring Conference, 3D printing helped some health facilities bridge the gap when supplies of personal protective equipment (PPE) ran low during the COVID-19 pandemic.
“COVID-19 has shown that PPE supply constraints are not confined to developing world hospitals,” Katelin Jackson, MPH, MS, a doctoral candidate at the Washington State University Paul G. Allen School for Global Health, said while presenting the study at the conference.
According to Jackson, a 2020 SHEA Research Network Survey of 69 hospitals found that 40% of the hospitals’ PPE supplies were limited or at crisis levels, 68% were extending usage time for respirators, 48% were reprocessing respirators and 13% were self-producing, which including the use of 3D printing.
In addition to hospitals using their own 3D printers, companies and individuals were enlisted to help generate the products, with one California company offering a COVID-19 Maker Response Hub. According to the company’s website, it helped facilitate the delivery of more than 75,000 3D-printed PPE items to 181 hospitals.
“Can 3D printing be a solution to hospital PPE shortages?” Jackson said. “The printing process is not smooth. It prints in layers that can leave these nooks and crannies that bacteria might love to live in. We wanted to know, does the bacteria grow on these items and, if it does, does the material type matter?”
Jackson and colleagues compared the standard 3D-printing material polylactic acid (PLA) with two filaments, Plactive and Purement, which are purported to be antibacterial because they incorporate copper and silver to reduce bacterial populations, according to the researchers.
For their study, they exposed 3D-printed disks made of the three materials for either 3 or 24 hours to MRSA, Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae to determine whether bacteria would grow on them. In the case disks printed using PLA, the researchers also conducted a disinfection test to determine colony-forming unit (CFU) averages before and after they were cleaned.
Overall, Jackson and colleagues found that 3D-printed materials are “readily contaminated with bacteria in hospitals and can sustain that contamination.”
According to their experiment, Plactive and Purement had lower levels of bacterial contamination compared with PLA, but disinfected PLA disks had lower overall CFU average, although bacterial populations were recovered within hours after disinfection.
The researchers said 3D printing supplies may be invaluable for hospitals, especially during emergencies, and that proper disinfection and use of appropriate 3D-printed materials may help limit bacterial contamination.
“Placative does reduce [contamination] — but not for the long term,” Jackson said, adding that “bacterial survivability is affected by contact times and, as a takeaway, 3D-printed items are best for one-time use. At least for now.”
Collapse
Jackson K, et al. 3D printers in hospitals: Reducing bacterial contamination on 3D-printed materials. Presented at: Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America Spring Conference; April 11-15, 2023; Seattle.
Read more about
Click Here to Manage Email Alerts