WASHROOMS
Units designed to purify air in washrooms are not medical devices, so they sit outside the Medical Devices Regulations 2002 and have no place in theatres.
Standalone units require dedicated mounting brackets, independent electrical spurs, and individual line items on preventative maintenance schedules. Integrated units reduce disruption and lower facilities management overheads across hospital sites containing hundreds of sanitary spaces. Procurement speed varies by provider type – it is a factor worth weighing alongside the technical case. NHS Trusts typically route capital equipment decisions through stakeholder committees and budget cycles, which can extend adoption timelines. Private hospital groups, by contrast, generally have shorter approval chains in the form of a site or group-level sign-off rather than a Trust-wide committee. This makes the route to market for new hygiene technology faster, even when where the underlying infection control is identical.
Knowing where this technology belongs Be precise about scope. Units designed to purify air in washrooms are not medical devices, so they sit outside the Medical Devices Regulations 2002 and have no place in theatres, or anywhere already governed by scrub protocol. Their placement targets general sanitary facilities: ward toilets, outpatient facilities, visitor washrooms, and staff rest areas – a description that fits private estates as readily as public ones. The value of these units increases significantly in areas housing vulnerable patients, particularly oncology and chemotherapy units, where reducing background bioaerosol concentrations offers vital protection against infections. Emergency departments and acute washrooms similarly carry elevated transmission risks due to rapid, high-turnover user cycles involving norovirus or seasonal respiratory cases. Failure to manage sanitary air properly has regulatory teeth. It sits under COSHH Regulations 2002 and CQC Fundamental Standards Regulation 12 (Safe Care and Treatment). Hand dryers that decontaminate the air passing through them add a layer of protection in the spaces where washroom risk concentrates – repeat use by strangers, within minutes of someone unwell having left – working on both fronts: reducing what is available to inhale directly and reducing what settles to become tomorrow’s touchpoint contamination. Chemical choice matters, too, particularly given how enclosed most washrooms are. During an outbreak, detergents are typically swapped for chlorine-based solutions, often around 1,000 parts per million, or an equivalent product proven effective against respiratory and enteric viruses, to stabilise surfaces where settled aerosols land. High-frequency chemical use in a tightly ventilated space brings its own trade-off; products that outgas high levels of volatile organic compounds can degrade indoor air quality further, adding to the respiratory burden on patients and on the cleaning staff working in that environment.
Any air treatment strategy needs to sit alongside that reality rather than compound it, which is one more reason a device’s running characteristics deserve as much scrutiny as its headline claims.
Redefining clean so it can be audited Addressing airborne bioaerosols does not require altering existing hygiene protocols. The extraction rates mandated by HTM 03-01, the strict segregation of red-zone cleaning equipment, and dust removal protocols remain essential steps. Active air treatment closes the operational window between mechanical air exchanges and domestic cleaning shifts. Expanding the definition of washroom cleanliness to include air volume requires establishing clear measurement and validation protocols. This transition marks a practical shift for healthcare estates teams, treating independently verified air performance as a formal specification metric alongside surface cleanliness audits. A robust hygiene framework operates across three distinct tiers. Mechanical extraction under HTM 03-01 serves as the baseline, maintaining negative pressure and bulk air exchange to prevent exfiltration into hospital corridors. Domestic surface decontamination under the National Standards 2025 delivers episodic, shift-based removal of physical contaminants and surface pathogens using color-coded equipment. Continuous active air decontamination fills the remaining gap, mitigating transient bioaerosol surges during the inter-cleaning window by targeting flush plumes and suspended droplets in real time. Air hygiene technology is rapidly advancing, and
healthcare providers benefit from implementing proactive measures rather than reacting after an outbreak occurs. Individual healthcare providers do not need to wait for top-down national standards. Estates teams can integrate air performance criteria into procurement specifications immediately by requiring suppliers to provide independent biosafety evidence. Healthcare environments require hygiene standards
that cover the entire room, not merely the physical touchpoints a cloth can reach. Achieving this requires acknowledging an operational reality: a washroom can appear immaculate while maintaining high bioaerosol loads, because airborne particulates were never included on the cleaning checklist. Addressing this gap does not mean dismantling current systems but rather implementing the missing layer to ensure complete environmental safety. While the case for continuous air treatment extends beyond healthcare, any high-turnover shared washroom faces some version of this exposure window. Nowhere is the margin for error smaller than where patients, staff, and visitors share space with infection.
Shared toilets mean inhaling whatever the previous occupant flushed into the air.
Steve Levy
Steve Levy is an inventor, entrepreneur, and the founder and CEO of Handy Dryers. Drawing on extensive experience in commercial washroom solutions, Steve develops innovative technologies to elevate hygiene, efficiency, and the user experience. Driven to challenge conventional thinking, he focuses on delivering high- performance, practical solutions for modern commercial environments.
October 2026 Health Estate Journal 93
Nickbeer
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 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180 |
Page 181 |
Page 182 |
Page 183 |
Page 184 |
Page 185 |
Page 186 |
Page 187 |
Page 188
