Evaluation of Antibacterial Activity of Non-alcoholic Quick Spray (Virobac Spray)

Document Type : Research Paper


1 1. ( Ph.D), microbiology, Antimicrobial Resistance Research Center, Buali Researrch Institute& Department of Microbiology and virology, Faculty of Medicine , Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran .

2 2. (MD, Ph.D), microbiology, Associate Professor, Antimicrobial Resistance Research Center, Buali Researrch Institute& Department of Microbiology and virology, Faculty of Medicine , Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran .


Introduction: Now a day, there is a crucial need for a quick and effective disinfectant to prevent nosocomial infections in hospitals. Meanwhile evaluation and validation of disinfectants are important. hospital surfaces, instruments, and rooms. the aim of this study was to evaluate the effect, quality and disinfectant activity of the Quick spray (Virobac Spray).
Material and methods: Antibacterial activity of Quick spray (Virobac Spray) was evaluated on four different gram-positive and gram-negative bacterial strain including Staphylococcus aureus (ATCC 29737), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (ATCC 28753), Escherichia coli (ATCC 25922) and Enterococcus faecalis (ATCC 1237. The antimicrobial solution was examined in ½, ¼, and 1/8 dilutions, and the antibacterial effect was determined after the exposure time such as 45, 60, 90, and 120 seconds.
Result: Quick spray (Virobac Spray) show a powerful antibacterial activity even in ½ dilution, also we demonstrate that the antibacterial activity of this solution will be enhanced with increased time of exposure.
Conclusion: the result of this study demonstrated that Quick spray (Virobac Spray) is a broad-spectrum and effective disinfectant and are able to inhibit the growth of a wide range of bacteria including gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria.


1. ZARENIYA, Morteza, et al. Study the efficacy of antimicrobial activities of eight clinically applied disinfectants against
clinical isolated of Enterococci and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Pharmaceutical Sciences, 2016, 23.2: 159-165.
2. Yousefi mashouf R FM, Heidar barghi Z. Efficacy of the disinfectants and antiseptics used in hospitals. yafte.
3. Mohammadi F TB, Davudian E, Maleki A, Maleknia S, Sadeghi fard N. Evaluation of drug resistance frequency among
Entrococcus faecium and Entrococcus faecalis strains and detection of vanA/B genes in vancomycin resistance isolated
by PCR method in Ilam and Kermanshah hospitals. Iran J Med Microbiol. 2011;5(1):14-8.
4. Heidari-soureshjani E, Heidari M, Doosti A. Epidemiology of urinary tract infection and antibiotic resistance pattern of
E. coli in patients referred to Imam Ali hospital in Farokhshahr, Chaharmahal va Bakhtiari, Iran. Journal of Shahrekord
Uuniversity of Medical Sciences. 2013;15(2):9-15.
5. Sharkhizan M, Yousefi Mashoof R, Balalifard S, Esmaeili R. Evaluation of efficacy of new disinfectants of Sanosil,
Alprocide, Bibfort and Javel-dose compared with Micro 10 and Deconex on isolated organisms from dentistry units.
Pajouhan Scientific Journal. 2014.9-44:)4(21;
6. Esmaeili R, Yousefimashouf R, Ramazani A. The evaluation of bacterial contamination of ophtalmic biomicroscopy
apparatus (Slit-lamp) in eye centers of Farshcian Hospital in Hamadan and assessment of the current disinfectants.
Pajouhan Scientific Journal. 2014;12(2).
7. Culver DH, Horan TC, Gaynes RP, Martone WJ, Jarvis WR, Emori TG, et al. Surgical wound infection rates by wound
class, operative procedure, and patient risk index. The American journal of medicine. 1991;91(3):S152-S7.
8. Nasoohi N, Vand Yousefi J, Mahdisear F, Sheikhiekh Gol Zardi M. Evaluation of Antibacterial Effects Of Three
Disinfectant Solutions On Dental Operatory Surfaces. journal of research in dental sciences. 2012;9(1):36-43.
9. Dancer SJ. Controlling hospital-acquired infection: focus on the role of the environment and new technologies for
decontamination. Clinical microbiology reviews. 2014;27(4):665-90.
10. Nakhaee M, Momen Heravi M. Evaluation of Antibacterial Efficiency of Hygienic Handâ Rub â Dermoseptâ. medical
journal of mashhad university of medical sciences. 2015;58(1):21-5.
11. Gavaldà L, Olmo AR, Hernández R, Domínguez MA, Salamonsen MR, Ayats J, et al. Microbiological monitoring of
flexible bronchoscopes after high-level disinfection and flushing channels with alcohol: results and costs. Respiratory
medicine. 2015;109(8):1079-85.
12. Fazeli MR, Mahboubi A, Rezayat SM, Samadi N, Jamalifar H. Pharmacopoeial specifications and effect of dilution on
bactericidal activity of commercially available povidone iodine solutions in Iran. Medical Science Journal of Islamic
Azad Univesity-Tehran Medical Branch. 2012;22(1):51-6.
13. Vahedi M, Bakianian Vaziri P, Abdolsamadi H, Pahlavan A, Hajilooii M, Abdollahzadeh S. Evaluation of antimicrobial
effect of four disinfectant solutions on handpieces contaminated to staphylococcus aureus , pseudomonas aeruginosa
and candida albicans. Journal of Dental Medicine. 2008;21(2):132-9.
14. Goldmann DA, Huskins WC. Control of nosocomial antimicrobial-resistant bacteria: a strategic priority for hospitals
worldwide. Clinical infectious diseases. 1997;24(Supplement_1):S139-S45.
15. Azma E, Sadeghi Khanjani M, Kazemnejad Leili E, Baghernia M. Comparison of the antimicrobial effects of iranian
disinfectant disept with disinfectants helvemed forte and micro10 enzyme. Journal of Mashhad Dental School.