Guideline for the Prevention and Control of Norovirus Gastroenteritis Outbreaks in Healthcare Settings, 2011
Download the complete PDF version Guideline for the Prevention and Control of Norovirus Gastroenteritis Outbreaks in Healthcare Settings, 2011 [PDF - 676 KB] and Appendices [PDF - 3.48 MB].
GRADE Table Q3 What Patient Interventions Best Prevent Or Contain Norovirus Outbreaks In The Healthcare Setting?
Virus Shedding
| Comparison | Outcome | Quantity and type of evidence | Findings | Starting grade | Decrease GRADE | Increase GRADE | GRADE of Evidence for Outcome | Overall GRADE of Evidence Base | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S t u d y Q u a l i t y ** |
C o n s i s t e n c y ** |
D i r e c t n e s s ** |
P r e c i s i o n ** |
P u b l i c a t i o n B i a s ** |
L a r g e M a g n i t u d e ** |
D o s e - r e s p o n s e |
C o n f o u n d e r s |
|||||||
Virus shedding |
Duration of shedding |
2 DES 149, 150 |
78% of infected cases were shedding virus on day 1 compared to 26% on day 22 in 1 DES 149. The rate was highest in newborns An elderly woman shed norovirus on day 2 and day 5 after resolution of symptoms 150 |
High |
0 |
0 |
0 |
−1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Moderate |
- |
Factors associated with shedding |
1 OBS 148 |
Age ≤ 6 months was a possible risk factor when compared with age > 1 year for increased viral shedding in 1 OBS 148 The rate was highest in newborns 1 DES 149 |
Low |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Low |
||
Asymptomatic shedding |
3 DES 150-152 |
Asymptomatic shedding was reported in 3 DES 150-152 |
High |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
High |
||
Recovery of norovirus
| Comparison | Outcome | Quantity and type of evidence | Findings | Starting grade | Decrease GRADE | Increase GRADE | GRADE of Evidence for Outcome | Overall GRADE of Evidence Base | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S t u d y Q u a l i t y ** |
C o n s i s t e n c y ** |
D i r e c t n e s s ** |
P r e c i s i o n ** |
P u b l i c a t i o n B i a s ** |
L a r g e M a g n i t u d e ** |
D o s e - r e s p o n s e |
C o n f o u n d e r s |
|||||||
Fomites |
Transfer of norovirus* |
1 BAS 194 |
One BAS demonstrated that norovirus-contaminated surfaces can be readily transferred to other fomites (telephones, taps, door handles) via fingertips even when virus has been left to dry for 15 minutes in 30-50% of opportunities 194 |
High |
0 |
0 |
−1 |
−1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Low |
Low |
Duration of Recovery |
1 SR 153 of DES |
norovirus remained viable in carpets up to 12 days despite regular vacuuming in 1 SR 153 norovirus was undetectable in areas of previously known contamination after 5 months had elapsed 141 |
Low |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Low |
||
Location of norovirus/ FCV Recovery |
1 SR 153 of DES |
36% of swabs were positive from curtains, cushions, carpets, lockers, commodes, toilet rims, seats and handles, taps, basins, telephones, door handles, physiotherapy instrument handles, and horizontal surfaces above 1.5 meters (i.e., mantle piece and light fittings where direct handling is unlikely) and below 1.5 meters (i.e., tables and ledges where direct handling may occur) in 1 SR 153 Other environmental surfaces identified were bathroom surfaces like toilet seats, handrails and taps; horizontal surfaces near toilets like tables, mantel pieces, light fittings; kitchen surfaces like dining room tables; elevator buttons; bed rails; doorknobs; game consoles; instrument handles (e.g., ultrasound); soft furnishings like cushions and curtains; lockers 154, 155, 157-159, 161 FCV was recovered from computer keyboard and mouse; telephone buttons, receiver and wire in 1 DES 156 |
High |
0 |
−1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Moderate |
||
Foods and food preparation surfaces |
Location of norovirus Recovery |
3 BAS 112, 162, 163 |
Norovirus was transferred via gloved hands and detected on foods like lettuce, strawberry and ham. norovirus was also detected on food preparation surfaces like stainless steel, ceramic and formica surfaces; spatula; fork; cutting board 112, 162, 163 |
High |
0 |
0 |
−1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Moderate |
Low |
Transfer of norovirus* |
2 BAS 162, 163 |
Significantly higher transfer to wet lettuce (P<0.01). For dry lettuce, the transfer at time 0 was statistically significantly higher than at times 30 and 60 min (P<0.05). For wet lettuce, the transfer at time 0 was statistically significantly higher than at times 10, 30 and 60 min (P<0.05) 162 Transferred via gloved hands in 1 BAS 163 |
High |
−0 |
0 |
−1 |
−1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Low |
||
Factors associated with recovery |
1 BAS 112 |
In 1 BAS 112, its recovery on ham was significantly greater when compared to other food and surface items. |
High |
−0 |
0 |
−1 |
−1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Low |
||
Duration of Recovery |
2 BAS 112, 162 |
At room temperature and 4°C, FCV titers were significantly reduced by Day 7 in 1 BAS 112 norovirus was detected on all plated sterile surfaces, with the most significant reduction in titer occurring after 24hrs without cleaning or disinfection. Over 7 days, observed 6-7 log10 reduction in recovery in 1 BAS 162 |
High |
0 |
0 |
−1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Moderate |
||
Water |
Recovery of norovirus |
3 DES 155, 158, 160 |
norovirus was detected in water samples in 1 DES 160and not detected in 2 DES 155, 158 |
High |
0 |
0 |
0 |
−1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Moderate |
- |
