INFECTION CONTROL
The antimicrobial properties of copper have been recognised for centuries.
Fourth, design considerations must be incorporated into refurbishment and new build projects. Basin geometry, water delivery systems, and drainage configuration influence both microbial accumulation and dispersion dynamics. Estates teams play a central role in specifying systems that minimise stagnation, reduce splash generation, and limit the persistence of biofilm reservoirs. Fifth, mechanical systems must be understood as interconnected networks. Contamination within one section of pipework can migrate through shared drainage pathways. Isolated interventions may therefore be insufficient unless implemented across the system as a whole. Finally, emerging technologies are now available that
sit between the vertical sink drop and the U-Bend which have been proven to greatly reduce the likelihood of gram-negative bacteria from finding its way back to the open plug – thus reducing the risk of transmission in clinical areas. For healthcare infrastructure management, this represents a definable and controllable risk domain. Addressing it requires recognition that infection prevention is not confined to clinical procedures or surface hygiene. It extends into the engineering of the built environment and the management of the systems that operate within it.
A potential solution Mueller Europe has been working with an inventor, Dr. James Soothill MMBS, MD, FRCPath, a consultant microbiologist at Great Ormond Street Hospital to manufacture a mechanical modification, suitable for new build and retrofit projects. Developed to address this built environment
vulnerability, this drainage modification – along with the design and IP – are fully protected globally, to ensure the efficacy of the product as supplied to the NHS and broader healthcare markets. This system introduces a long, continuously descending copper conduit positioned between the sink outlet and the conventional trap. Its function is not to eliminate microbial presence within the wider drainage network, but to
34 Health Estate Journal June 2026
interrupt the physical mechanisms that allow organisms resident within the trap to reach the sink outlet. These types of mechanical intervention are based on
the recognition that vertical water entry into trap water can generate upward splash and particle movement. This upward movement provides a pathway for microorganisms within contaminated trap fluid to ascend towards the sink outlet or upper waste pipe. This type of design alters the geometry of fluid movement before it reaches the trap. Instead of allowing direct vertical entry, water descends along a sloped internal pathway that progressively redirects flow direction. This change in trajectory greatly reduces the likelihood that ‘splash’ or turbulent movement will travel back toward the outlet.
One key structural feature is the gradual change in
gradient within the conduit; this redirects flow through a substantial change in direction before reaching the trap. This configuration interrupts linear splash trajectories, meaning droplets or particulate material travelling upward are more likely to impact internal surfaces rather than continue vertically. The extended length and curvature of the conduit further increase the probability that suspended particles will settle or adhere before reaching the outlet.
The antimicrobial properties of copper In addition to geometric flow control, these devices are constructed from copper. The antimicrobial properties of copper have been recognised for centuries and are supported by modern microbiological evidence demonstrating reduced survival of multiple bacterial species on copper surfaces and in copper containing water environments. Incorporating copper into the drainage pathway
introduces an additional inhibitory influence on microbial persistence and can potentially slow biofilm development within the conduit itself. Clinical evaluations of this type of drainage modification have demonstrated measurable microbiological impact. A blind, randomised study
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72
