THE EFFECT OF HAND DRYERS ON RESTROOM INDOOR AIR QUALITY
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17770/etr2025vol1.8678Keywords:
Indoor Air Quality, Hand Dryers, Microbiological contamination, ParticlesAbstract
The widespread use of hand-dryers in public restrooms raises concerns about hygiene and indoor air quality. Hand-dryers facilitate microbial proliferation and aerosolization, increasing infection risk and degrading indoor air quality by dispersing pathogens and allergens. This study investigates microbial growth and air contamination, advancing the field by exploring factors such as humidity, airflow mechanics, and particle count concerning various hand-dryer types. Different models of 8 warm air dryers and 2 jet dryers in ten restrooms were sampled (4 female, 4 male and 2 accessible) in an academic institution. The study involved air sampling from the hand-dryer outlet for 30 seconds directly onto agar plates and surrounding air sampling using the “SAS SUPER ISO 180” device. Microbiological samples were then cultivated on different media, manually counted and identified. Fungi were identified by native smears and safranin staining, bacteria using VITEK. Particle count was measured before and during hand dryer use with “TSI P-TRAK”, while other variables such as room temperature, humidity, CO2 levels, hand dryer air flow velocity, temperature were also recorded. The data was processed using IBM SPSS. Statistically significant correlations were found: airflow temperature negatively correlated with fungal dispersal on Sabouraud agar (r=-0.747, p<0.05), CO₂ positively correlated with bacterial dispersal on Trypticase soy agar (TSA) (r=0.661, p<0.05), and humidity showed a significant positive correlation with TSA CFU/min (r=0.636, p<0.05). Microbial contamination was detected in all restrooms. Warm air dryers consistently emitted higher bacterial loads than jet dryers across all tested media. Hand-dryer air ranged from 0 to 1360 CFU/min, while restroom air ranged from 0 to 1424 CFU/m3. Most fungi identified were molds (Mucor spp., Penicillium spp., Aspergillus spp.), with 22 yeast colonies. Analysis identified various opportunistic and pathogenic bacteria, including Acinetobacter baumannii, Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus and other species. Average particles count before use was 7831, while during use 11668. The findings indicate that while hand dryers may contribute to bacterial and fungal dispersal, factors such as airflow temperature, humidity, and CO2 levels also play significant roles in microbial behavior.
References
S. A. Alharbi, S. H. Salmen, A. Chinnathambi, N. S. Alharbi, M. Zayed, B. O. Al-Johny, and M. Wainwright, “Assessment of the bacterial contamination of hand air dryer in washrooms,” Saudi J. Biol. Sci., vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 268–271, 2015. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sjbs.2015.06.020
A. Gerhardts, T. R. Hammer, C. Balluff, H. Mucha, and D. Hoefer, “A model of the transmission of microorganisms in a public setting and its correlation to pathogen infection risks,” J. Appl. Microbiol., vol. 112, no. 3, pp. 614–621, 2012. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672.2012.05234.x
S. J. Pitt, S. L. Crockett, and G. M. Andreou, “The contribution of hand drying in prevention of transmission of microorganisms: Comparison of the efficacy of three hand drying methods in the removal and distribution of microorganisms,” J. Infect. Prev., vol. 19, no. 6, pp. 310–317, 2018. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1177/1757177418789485
J. H. Taylor, K. L. Brown, J. Toivenen, and J. T. Holah, “A microbiological evaluation of warm air hand driers with respect to hand hygiene and the washroom environment,” J. Appl. Microbiol., vol. 89, no. 6, pp. 910–919, 2000. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2672.2000.01205.x
E. L. Best, P. Parnell, and M. H. Wilcox, “Microbiological comparison of hand-drying methods: the potential for contamination of the environment, user, and bystander,” J. Hosp. Infect., vol. 88, no. 4, pp. 199–206, 2014. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2014.08.002
C. Huang, W. Ma, and S. Stack, “The hygienic efficacy of different hand-drying methods: A review of the evidence,” Mayo Clin. Proc., vol. 87, no. 8, pp. 791–798, 2012. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocp.2012.02.019
P. T. Kimmitt and K. F. Redway, “Evaluation of the potential for virus dispersal during hand drying: A comparison of three methods,” J. Appl. Microbiol., vol. 120, no. 2, pp. 478–486, 2016. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1111/jam.13014
B. Knights, C. Evans, S. Barrass, and B. McHardy, Hand Drying: Assessment of Efficiency and Hygiene of Different Methods. London: University of Westminster, 1993.
Y. Yamamoto, K. Ugai, and Y. Takahashi, “Efficiency of hand drying for removing bacteria from washed hands: Comparison of paper towel drying with warm air drying,” Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol., vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 316–320, 2005. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1086/502543
J. Holah and H. L. M. Lelieveld, Hygienic Control in the Design, Construction and Renovation of Food Processing Factories, 2011.
O. P. Snyder, “Hand washing for retail food operations – A review,” Dairy Food Environ. Sanit., vol. 18, pp. 149–162, 1998.
M. H. Wilcox, E. L. Best, and P. Parnell, “Microbiological comparison of hand-drying methods: the potential for contamination of the environment, user, and bystander,” J. Hosp. Infect., vol. 100, no. 4, pp. e85–e86, 2018. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2018.08.007
J. W. Tang, “The effect of environmental parameters on the survival of airborne infectious agents,” J. R. Soc. Interface, vol. 6, Suppl. 6, pp. S737–S746, 2009. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2009.0227.focus
P. Zhao, X. Li, and J. Li, “Effects of temperature and humidity on the viability of airborne Mycobacterium tuberculosis,” J. Theor. Biol., vol. 486, p. 110084, 2020. [Online].Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2019.110084
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Amanda Anna Vinceviča, G R Devesh Krishnan, Zanna Martinsone

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.