Healthcare Cleaning Guidelines
The rules manage cleaning of the environment in healthcare insurance as it identifies with the avoidance and control of diseases. It is focused on the individuals who have a part in the administration of cleaning administrations for the human services setting. It incorporates managers, infection control, the directors of Housekeeping, managers of development/support ventures and general wellbeing officers.

The rules give control measures and Infection Prevention for the following.

a) Understanding the standards of cleaning and sanitising ecological surfaces.

b) Infection transmission hazard evaluation to control the level of cleaning.

c) The cleaning procedures for various kinds of care zones, including particular cleaning for the anti-infection safe microorganisms.

d) The intervals in which the cleaning goes on.

e) The Cleaning systems for any spills of blood also for the body substances.

f) Cleaning rehearses for non-basic gear and furniture;

g) In the Handling of clothing and bedding;

h) Cleaning works on amid and following the finish of any development ventures.

Here is a Summary of the Recommendations

1. It is exceedingly suggested that Infection Prevention and control, occupational well-being and Safety and Environmental Services work on the whole of choice settling on as for decisions of furniture and completing for offices.

2. Note that the Routine cleaning is essential to keep up a standard of tidiness.

3. The determination of a perfect disinfectant will enormously rely upon its adequacy in disposing of a particular organism.

4. All chemicals ought to be appropriately marked and put away to take out any potential hazard of pollution and wounds.

5. Sufficient assets must be committed to Housekeeping work in all social insurance settings to guarantee:

a. Single people with appointed duties.
b. Composed systems for cleaning and sanitisation of care territories and hardware that include:

I. Characterised obligation regarding particular things and regions;
ii. Unmistakably characterised lines of responsibility;
iii. Systems for day by day and terminal cleaning and purification;
iv. Methods for cleaning in development/redesign territories;
v. Systems for particular earth hard microorganisms, for example, C. Difficult;
vi. Systems for episode administration.
vii. Cleaning and sanitisation norms and recurrence;

(c) Satisfactory HR to permit exhaustive and auspicious cleaning and sanitisation.

(d) Training and proceeding with the education of the staff involved in the cleanup.

(e)Observing of ecological tidiness, and also Progressing audit of the systems.

(6) When housekeeping administrations are contracted, the Occupational Health and Safety arrangements of the contracting administrations must be reliable with the office’s related Health and Safety strategies.

(7) Cleaning calendars ought to be created, with a recurrence of cleaning reflecting regardless of whether surfaces are high-touch or low-touch, the kind of action occurring in the territory and the contamination chance related with it; the helplessness of the customer/patients/inhabitants housed in the zone; and the likelihood of tainting.

(8) Non-basic restorative hardware requires cleaning and cleansing after each utilisation.

(9) Every therapeutic services setting ought to have composed strategies and systems for the proper cleaning of non-basic medicinal hardware that plainly characterises the recurrence and degree of cleaning and which allocates obligation regarding the cleanup.

(10) Foundations should actualise frameworks on recurrence of cleaning and occasionally conducts reviews to guarantee a spotless situation amid sustenance planning.

At CleanHire we provide industrial floor cleaning machines for hire and sale to the healthcare sector as well as industrial environments. Get in touch today for more information on our products.

Microbeads will be banned in cosmetic products by the end of 2017

Cosmetic microbeads image by Steve Cordory (via Shutterstock).
Microbeads, as seen in cosmetic items like toothpaste and shampoo. Image by Steve Cordory (via Shutterstock).

For some time, microbeads have appeared in our cleaning products, plus cosmetic products including toothpaste, shower gels, and shampoo. Due to their effects on the environment, there has been continued calls to withdraw their use. They cause problems to our food chain, particularly affecting marine wildlife.

On its journey downstream, from the plughole to the sea, maritime creatures ingest the particles that 5mm in diameter. This video below tells you why.

Microbeads are made of plastic and, owing to their economy, have a longer shelf life. Hence their popularity as an exfoliant.

Now, thanks to Michael Gove’s speech on the 21 July, the game’s up for microbeads in cosmetic products. Instead, salt, sugar, or coffee would become its more biodegradable successors. Last year, Gove’s predecessor, Andrea Leadsom, announced a consultation period for their ban. In 2015, Barack Obama’s government issued a similar ban throughout the United States of America.

Michael Gove’s speech confirmed Andrea Leadsom’s plan to ban the microscopic particles. Louisa Casson, on behalf of Greenpeace UK said on The Independent website: “The UK Government has just proposed the strongest ban on microbeads in the world to date. This is great news for our environment and a positive sign of Britain’s global leadership on ocean plastics.

“It’s crucial that ministers have left the door open to broadening the ban in future. To achieve a fully comprehensive ban covering all products that go down the drain, we need companies to be much more transparent about when their products contain harmful microbeads.

Since 1950, humans have produced a staggering 8.3 billion metric tons of plastic. In its wake, this has created 6.3 billion metric tons of waste. There are 300 billion microbeads in the Arctic Ocean alone.

Clean Hire, 28 July 2018.

5p bag levy sees fewer single use carrier bags

Carrier bags by Monticello (via Shutterstock).
Less waste: with fewer carrier bags being taken at the checkout, the 5p levy has resulted in more people reusing previously purchased bags. Image by Monticello (via Shutterstock).


This time one year ago, the 5p bag levy was akin to being the spawn of Satan. For a time, charging for carrier bags seemed like Armageddon for some commentators (though Kwik Save did so from the 1980s till its demise in 2007). Almost to the point it was claimed that oceans would rise; that house prices would fall; and that aeroplanes would fall from the sky. A year on, none of the hysterics happened. We lived our lives normally and adapted to the changes pretty well.

How well did we adjust to the five pence levy? Very well indeed. A survey from Cardiff University has noticed some changes in shoppers’ habits since its imposition. Though similar schemes are successful in Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland, its success in England was a potentially sterner test. The results are staggering. It was stated that:

  • 90% of shoppers reuse their carrier bags;
  • Only 7% of shoppers opt for carrier bags at the checkout;
  • One in two shoppers take their own bags for the carriage of clothing;
  • Increased support for 5p levy – and similar waste management levies for plastic water bottles.

As a result of the five pence levy, 90% of us shoppers reuse previously purchased carrier bags. Alongside single use bags that are widely available, this has meant reusable jute bags, rucksacks, and longer lasting ‘Bag For Life’ plastic carrier bags. As a consequence, only 7% of shoppers buy a bag each time they visit their local shops. This is a substantial drop from 25% in October 2015.

With clothiers eschewing plastic bags in favour of fashionable paper-based carrier bags, more shoppers have elected to reuse them instead of plumping for new bags. Last October, 10% of those surveyed did just that. Today, this figure stands at 50%.

Professor Wouter Poortinga, who headed the study at Cardiff University said: “Overall, our research has shown that the English carrier bag charge has had a strong and positive impact on people’s attitudes and behaviours and that it successfully disrupted people using plastic bags.

“We’ve seen that the charge has become increasingly popular with the English population since it was introduced, and that it has changed attitudes towards waste policies as well.”

Increased support for five pence levy and similar waste management schemes

In spite of the doomsday predictions from some quarters, 51% of shoppers favoured the 5p levy on the 05 October 2015. Today, this figure has climbed to 62%. Plus, there is increased support for the extension of similar schemes. For example, a levy on plastic water bottles. Or a much needed boost for rinse and return schemes (who remembers returning empty pop bottles to the local off-licence?). Among the suggestions mooted is a deposit scheme for plastic bottles, or a levy on disposable coffee cups.

So far, Starbucks Coffee rewards its customers with a modest discount for using their own mug instead of a disposable one. This is one small step, but advertising it as a discount for individual mugs rather than a levy for disposables is the way to go. So far, for disposable cup recycling, this is only the beginning.

Overview: Carrier Bag Charges

There has been a 5p levy on carrier bags in England since the 05 October 2015. Retail businesses with fewer than 200 employees are exempt from the charge, which should benefit independent shops. Furthermore, free carrier bags can only be dispensed if used to carry fresh food (for example: meat from the local butchers, or a small bag for the carriage of takeaway food including sandwiches).

For more details, GOV.UK has a helpful guide, which includes a video clip.

Clean Hire, 30 September 2016.