This study was conducted to establish bacterial contamination of cell phones and microbial contamination of mobile phones and isolate the significant bacterial species associated with these cell phones in reference to give necessary remedial measure. A total of 80 samples were collected to isolate microbial population associated with cell phones. Sterile swabs were firmly rubbed on the surface of the handset, the key buttons and on the screens of cell phones. The swabs were then inoculated into different media viz. Nutrient agar, MacConkey agar, Mannitol Salt agar and Eosin Methelyne Blue agar. A total of 143 different bacterial isolates recovered from these sample and were classified as: Staphylococcus spp. Corynebacterium spp., Streptococcus spp., Pseudomonas spp., Micrococcus spp., Proteus spp., Bacillus spp., and Enterobacter spp. at the ratio of 52, 17,14,7,4,3,2 and 1% respectively. The isolates were further subjected for Antibiotic susceptibility profiling and have found that most of the recovered isolates were challenging to Ampicillin, few isolates also shown intermediate results. Impimen, Norfloxacin and Gentamycin were sensitive towards most isolates. Ciprofloxacin and Chloramphenicol showed variable susceptibility to the different isolates. The study shown that all cell phones under investigation were significantly contaminated by numerous bacterial species. It is an also indication that the majority of them belongs to the normal flora of the human body as well as airborne and soil bacteria. Thus it can be said that it is necessary to sterilise hands after contact with a cell phone since it is a potential source of disease transmission.

1. Short Research Article
ANTIBIOTIC SUSCEPTIBILITY PROFILING OF BACTERIA
RECOVERED FROM CELL PHONES
BHAIRAV PRASAD1*
1
College of Health Science, Vidya Jyoti Eduversity, Derabassi, SAS Nagar -140508, Punjab, India.
AUTHOR’S CONTRIBUTION
The sole author designed, analyzed, interpreted and prepared the manuscript.
Received: 7th
July2018
Accepted: 22nd
August 2018
Published: 16th
November 2018
ABSTRACT
This study was conducted to establish bacterial contamination of cell phones and microbial contamination of
mobile phones and isolate the significant bacterial species associated with these cell phones in reference
to give necessary remedial measure. A total of 80 samples were collected to isolate microbial
population associated with cell phones. Sterile swabs were firmly rubbed on the surface of the handset, the
key buttons and on the screens of cell phones. The swabs were then inoculated into different media viz.
Nutrient agar, MacConkey agar, Mannitol Salt agar and Eosin Methelyne Blue agar. A total of 143
different bacterial isolates recovered from these sample and were classified as: Staphylococcus spp.
Corynebacterium spp., Streptococcus spp., Pseudomonas spp., Micrococcus spp., Proteus spp., Bacillus spp.,
and Enterobacter spp. at the ratio of 52, 17,14,7,4,3,2 and 1% respectively. The isolates were further
subjected for Antibiotic susceptibility profiling and have found that most of the recovered isolates were
challenging to Ampicillin, few isolates also shown intermediate results. Impimen, Norfloxacin and
Gentamycin were sensitive towards most isolates. Ciprofloxacin and Chloramphenicol showed variable
susceptibility to the different isolates. The study shown that all cell phones under investigation
were significantly contaminated by numerous bacterial species. It is an also indication that the majority of
them belongs to the normal flora of the human body as well as airborne and soil bacteria. Thus it can be said
that it is necessary to sterilise hands after contact with a cell phone since it is a potential source of disease
transmission.
Keywords: Antibiotic susceptibility, cell phone, Corynebacterium, Staphylococcus.
1. INTRODUCTION
Cell phones are extended range, handy convenient
electronic devices for personal telecommunication.
Nowadays Mobile phones have become crucial and
obligatory accessories of professional and communal
life [1]. The majority of adults and young childrens
now have their own mobile phones and they are just
addicted to it. Currently, Asia has the fastest
expansion rate of cellular phone subscribers in the
world and India is the leading country amongst the
subscribers. The Telecom and regulatory Authority of
India (TRAI, 2013-14) suggested that the India
contribute the use mobile phone increases at rate of
784.32 million as compared to 591.76 million a year
before [2]. The use of Mobile computing, Wi-Fi and
internet in research laboratories has become an
integral part of all modern laboratories and official
setups. The regular handling of cell phones and
supplementary electronic gadgets by various users at
Journal of International Research in Medical and
Pharmaceutical Sciences
13(3): 114-118, 2018
ISSN: 2395-4477 (P), ISSN: 2395-4485 (O)
International Knowledge Press
www.ikpress.org
114
*Corresponding author: Email: bhairavmicro@gmail.com;

2. different time exposes to an array of microorganisms
and thus makes these gadgets good reservoirs for
microbes [3]. The portable size of the cellular phone
makes it easy to use all the time including eating,
drinking, canteen, travelling, working in the kitchen,
hospitals and even in the toilets. The exposure of the
mobile phone in different geographic location
harbours a wide diversity of microbes in addition to
the normal flora of mankind. The outer layer of skin
due to its moisture content and optimum temperature
of human body particularly palms provides a suitable
site for microbial adherence and attachment. Next, to
these factors, the heat produced by mobile phones
contributes a vital role to microbes and their
transmission on the devices at disquieting rate [4].
Hence, it can be witnessed without any doubt that
mobiles and other electronic gadgets transmit
pathogenic microorganisms amongst the handlers and
spread many infections. Cellular phones can port a
variety of latent pathogens and serves as an
exogenous source of hospital acquired infections
amongst hospitalised and immune deficient patients
[5]. It is universally known that the microbes present
every ware and easily colonise in both living as well
as non-living things. The pathogenic microorganisms
easily colonised on human hand, skin and dress. They
also colonise in the instruments or electronic gadgets
used in the microbiology laboratory viz. mobile
phones, keyboards, office desks, computer keyboards,
computer mouse, microscopes, incubator, autoclave
and elevator buttons. Staff or persons working in this
setup daily come in contact with these inanimate
objects and acquire or transfer microbes from the
objects. Cellular phones and laptops being self-
governing items and are frequently used by students,
staff and researchers at the laboratories. These two
gadgets use widly in the laboratories play vital role in
transmission of pathogens in the laboratories and at
home, restaurants and other places. While attending
mobile phone during call the cell phone come in close
contact with strongly contaminated human body areas
like hands to hands, and hands to other areas like
mouth, nose, eyes and ears. Therefore the cellular
phone acts as good reservoir and vehicle for
transmission of verity of pathogenic microbes which
can cause severe acute as well as chronic infections.
The majority of bacteria has been associated with the
mobile phones are, Staphylococcus sp., Streptococcus
sp., Proteus sp., Corynebacterium sp., Bacillus sp.,
Pseudomonas sp., Acinitobater sp., E. coli,
Enterobacter, sp. [6]. The present study was aimed to
evaluate that the cell phones are the stay house for
potential bacterial pathogens and one of the major
route of transmitting disease amongst the users or
handlers and to determine the antibiotics susceptibility
profiling of the isolated organisms.
2. MATERIALS AND METHODS
2.1 Material Used
2.1.1 Chemicals and glassware
All the chemicals used for the preparation of reagents
and solutions were procured from Hi-media, SD-fine
chemicals, Loba-chemicals (India) and were of AR
Grade. For isolation and biochemical characterisation
of the isolates, dehydrated media used were procured
from Hi-media and were used as such as per the
manufacturer’s directions. All the glassware’s like test
tubes, beaker, conical flasks, were of Borosil grade.
2.2 Methods
The samples were collected from the mobile phones
of 80 devices during a period from January to March,
2017 in Mohali and Chandigarh city, of Punjab
(India). Each swab dipped in normal saline was
rubbed over the cell phone surface and stored in the
same tube and transported for further processing.
Immediately after arrival in the laboratory the sample
were streaked on cultivation media viz. Nutrient agar
and MacConkey agar, Mannitol salt agar and Eosin
Methelyne Blue agar. The plates were incubated
aerobicallly at 34±37°C for 48 hours and observed for
growth and colonial description of the isolates.
2.2.1 Characterisation and partial identification of
isolates
The isolates were identified by their morphological,
cultural and biochemical characteristics by standard
methods using Bergey’s Manual of Systematic
Bacteriology [7]. The morphological characterisation
was done by studying colony morphology, Gram
staining, and motility. The biochemical reactions
include Catalase, Oxidase, IMViC, Nitrate Reduction,
Urease, Decarboxylase, Phospholipase, H2S
production, Sulphide Indole Motility, Triple Sugar
Iron Agar, etc. [8].
2.3 Antibiotic Susceptibility Test
For AST profiling Mueller Hinton agar plates were
prepared. Overnight old culture of different isolates
was standardised with 0.5 Macfarland standards.
500µl of the aliquots each isolates aseptically
transferred to the MHA plate and spread over the
entire surface of the agar completely to make a lawn.
The antibiotic discs were placed over agar plate with
better contact. The plates were incubated for 24 hrs at
35º C. After 24 hours, the zone of inhibition has been
observed and recorded [9].
Prasad, B.; JIRMEPS, 13(3): 114-118, 2018
115

3. 3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A total of 143 bacterial isolates was recovered from
the 80 samples. This research confirms that a diversity
of microbes was found on cell phones. The analysis
report shown a diverse bacterial genera residing on
the cell phone viz. Staphylococcus spp.
Corynebacterium spp., Streptococcus spp.,
Pseudomonas spp., Micrococcus spp., Proteus spp.,
Bacillus spp., and Enterobacter spp.. Out of 143
bacterial isolates the prevalence: Staphylococcus spp.
(57%), Corynebacterium spp. (17%) Streptococcus
spp. (14%) Pseudomonas spp. (7%), Micrococcus
spp. (4%), Proteus spp. (3%), Bacillus spp. (2%), and
Enterobacter spp. (1%) respectively and is shown in
Fig. 1. The diversified range of these organisms
possibly colonises into the mobile through the skin,
mouth, contact to the inanimate objects and from hand
to hand. The study also revealed that the majority of
microbial diversity is part of the normal micro flora of
the human body. The prevalence of the isolates and
the degree of population is influenced by the frequent
handling of cell phones by many users and regular
contact with the skins, mouth and other inanimate
objects.
The presence of Gram positive viz. Staphylococcus
spp., Streptococcus spp., and Corynebacterium spp.
are known to be part of normal flora and cause acute
infection ranging from surface skin infection like
Pimples boils to Sepsis. The complicated implication
viz. Pneumonia and Meningitis may be influenced by
the high inhabitants of colony isolates [10]. The
isolates of Enterobacter spp., Gram negative-rod
member of coliforms may indicates the fecal
contamination or unhygienic handling of cell phones.
It has also been known that Enterobacter spp., and
Pseudomonas spp. most commonly causes the Gram-
negative sepsis. It was also reported that the Gram
negative produced endotoxin or lipopolysaccharide
(LPS) has been concerned as a main initiator of the
pathogenesis of septic shock syndrome. The presence
of Bacillus spp. has been recognised as vital bacteria
Fig. 1. Prevalence of bacterial isolates recovered from mobile phone
associated in food spoilage. The overall data revealed
that the cellular phones which make communication
simple and handy also form excellent vehicles of
pathogenic agents of disease transmission [11]. If
precautions are not taken in sincerely, they could be
vector for the transmission of biological weapons and
spreading of germs. It was also shown that mobile
phones get contaminated with several bacteria viz.
Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas
aeruginosa and Klebsiella pneumonia. These all are
reported as noscomial pathogens and which can easily
adhere on the cell phones and may cause hospital
acquired infections. The users of cellular phone
phones are found everywhere: in the marketplace,
house, office, hospitals, schools, canteens and
restaurants etc. or even the users carry mobiles phones
to the kitchen, toilets or bathrooms. Therefore the
cellular phones are the vital vehicles of spreading
germs or microorganism in the community. Today,
mobile phones are important utensils for physicians
and other health workers [6]. The use of cell phones
in the health care setup such as in the wards, operation
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
%PREVALENCE
ISOLATES
Prasad, B..; JIRMEPS, 13(3): 114-118, 2018
116

4. theaters, intensive care unit and other important areas
in hospital should be restricted or limited to ovoid the
chances of nosocomial infection. But the restricted
use of cell phones by health care workers is not a real
solution. Many researchers suggested that to reduce
the incidence of hospital acquired infection and cross
infection by strict hand hygiene practice. In addition
to this the staff and the people should be aware that
these devices may be a potential source for
transmission of nosocomial infections to and from the
society. The health care setup or hospital atmosphere
plays a significant role in the transmission of
pathogens associated with hospital acquired
infections. Pathogens may be acquired from
individual to individual or from non-living objects
(such as thermometers, Sphygmomanometers,
stethoscopes, bronchoscopes, pagers, writing
implement, rest home, sanatorium, clinic, computer
keyboards, mobile phones and land lines or any other
electronic gadgets) to hands and vice versa [12].
3.1 Antibiotic Sensitivity Test
In the present study, all the isolates were sensitive to
Norfloxacin and considered as an effective drug. The
Sensitivity range was measured a range from 21 mm
to 26 mm zone of inhibition for all the isolates.
Similarly all the isolates found to be sensitive towards
Impimen ranging from 18-19.5mm zone of inhibition
except Bacillus spp. Many of the recovered isolates
were opposed to Ampicllin, while the some isolates
with intermediate value. Similarly chloramphenicol
was resistant, intermediate as well as sensitive drug. It
was found that antibiotic ciprofloxacin was sensitive
to most of the isolates. The result of the antibiotic
profiling of all the isolates is shown in Table 1 and
Fig. 2. Similarly, Ahmed et al. [13] found that more
than 90% isolates were sensitive to the antibiotic
Norfloxacin. Impimen belongs to carbapenem group
of antibiotics which have the ability to bind with
different penicillin binding proteins, Impimen is the
most effective drug against Pseudomonas, Proteus,
Enterobacter, Staphylococcus, Streptococcus and
Corynebacterium. Mansour et al. [14] found 87%
isolates were sensitive, 13% showed an intermediate
pattern for Impimen. Prolong treatment with Impimen
in Pseudomonas infected patients has often allowed
the emergence of resistant mutants against it. Todar
[15], described most of the gram negative isolates
spreading nosocomial infection as being notorious.
This is supportive in tolerating adverse conditions are
due to the presence of their hard cell wall that
contains porins. Porins are protein channel embedded
in the cell wall acting as efflux pumps, which pump
antibiotic before it able to work. The genes for drug
resistance are present in both the bacterial
chromosome and plasmid. The problem of
antimicrobial resistance may be greater in high-risk
groups such as immune-compromised patients [16].
Table 1. Antibiotic Susceptibility profiling of the cell phone isolates
Isolates Chlora-
Phenicol
Cipro-
Floxacin
Ampicillin Genta-
Mycin
Impimen Norfloxa-
cin
Zone of inhibition in millimeter (mm)
Staphylococcus spp. 25 S 19 S 18 R 15 S 18 S 21 S
Corynebacterium spp. 12 R 19.5 S 18.5 R 15.5 S 16 S 23 S
Streptococcus spp. 19.5 S 15 R 17.5 R 16 S 18 S 21.5 S
Micrococcus spp. 15.5 I 14.5 S 19.5 I 13.5 I 20.5 S 30 S
Pseudomonas spp. 12 R 21 S 18 R 16 S 18 S 23 S
Proteus spp. 12 R 17.5 I 18 R 14.4 I 18.5 S 25.5 S
Bacillus spp. 11 R 21.5 S 17.5 R 15.5 S 21 I 26 S
Enterobacter spp. 15.5 I 21 S 20.5 I 15 S 19.5 S 21 S
R: Resistant; I: Intermediate and S: Sensitive
Prasad, B.; JIRMEPS, 13(3): 114-118, 2018
117

5. Fig. 2. Antibiotic susceptibility test
4. CONCLUSION
The study showed that all cell phones under
investigation were significantly contaminated by
numerous bacterial species. It is an also indication
that the majority of them belongs to the normal flora
of the human body as well as airborne and soil
bacteria. Thus it can be said that it is necessary to
sterilize hands after contact with a cell phone since it
is a potential source of disease transmission.
CONSENT
It is not applicable.
ETHICAL APPROVAL
It is not applicable.
COMPETING INTERESTS
Author has declared that no competing interests exist.
REFERENCES
1. Selim HS, Inama AFA. (2012). Microbial
contamination in health care settings of Egypt.
Pub Med Information, 5-10.
2. Aroa, U., Devi, P., Chadha, A. and Malhotra,
S. (2009). Cell phone a modern stay house
for bacterial pathogen. JK Science, 11(3): 127-
129.
3. Singh A, Purohit B. (2014). Mobile phones a
serious threat of infections. Occupational
Health Safety, 3(42):42-44.
4. Rana, R., Joshi, K., Kaur, S. (2013). Cell
phones –homes for microbes. J. of biological
and medical research, 4 (3): 3402-05.
5. Tagoe, DN, Gyande, VK., Ansah, EO. (2011).
Bacterial contamination of mobile phones. Web
med central microbiology, 2(10): 2294.
6. Jaya Madhuri R, Saraswathi M, Mahitha G,
Bhargavi M, Deepika S, Vijaya Lakshmi G.
(2015). Bacterial contamination of mobile
phones and computers in microbiological
laboratories. European Journal of
Biotechnology and Bioscience, 3(9): 51-55.
7. Krieg, N.R., Ludwig, W., Whitman, W.B.,
Hedlund, B.P., Paster, B.J., Staley, J.T., Ward,
N. and Brown, D. (eds., 2010). Bergey’s
Manual of Systematic Bacteriology, 2nd ed.,
vol. 4, Springer-Verlag, New York, NY.
8. Aneja, KR. (2003). Experiments in
Microbiology Plant Pathology and
Biotechnology. New Age Int. Pub, 178-297.
9. Hemalatha, N. and Dhasarathan, P. (2010).
Multi-drug resistant capability of Pseudomonas
aeruginosa isolates from nasocomal and non-
nasocomal sources. J. Biomed. Sci. Res. 2:
236-239.
10. Brady RR, Fraser SF, Dunlop MG, Brown SP,
and Gibb AP. (2007). Bacterial contamination
of mobile communication devices in the
operative environment. J Hosp Infect. 66:
397–8.
11. Brady RR, Wasson A, Stirling I, McAllister C,
Damani NN. (2006). Is your phone bugged?
The incidence of bacteria known to cause
nosocomial infection on healthcare workers’
mobile phones. J Hosp Infect. 62:123–5.
12. Tahtaci M. (2007). The role of mobile phones
in the spread of bacteria associated with
nosocomial infections. J Infect Dev Ctries,
1:72–3.
13. Ahmed, M., Sahile, S. and Subramanian, C.
(2014). Evaluation of Antibacterial potential of
Honey Against some common Human
pathogens in North Gondar zone of Ethiopia. I.
J. Pure and Appl. Zoology. 2 (4): 286-295.
14. Mansour, SA, Eldaly O, Jiman-Fatani A,
Mohamed ML and Ibrahim EM. (2013).
Epidemiological characterization of P.
aeruginosa isolates of ICUs in Egypt and Saudi
Arabia. Eastern Mediterranean Health
Journal, 19(1): 71-80.
15. Todar, K. (2002). Textbook of Bacteriology.
Intm. Pp. 1-8.
16. Steinstraesser, L., Oezdogan, Y., Wang, S.C.,
Steinau, H.U. (2004). Host defense peptides in
burns. Burns, 30: 619-27.
Prasad, B.; JIRMEPS, 13(3): 114-118, 2018
________________________________________________________________________________
© Copyright International Knowledge Press. All rights reserved.
118