Skip to Main Content

The total viable count and HPC of spray water from warm-water bidet toilet seats and control tap water are shown in Table 2. The total viable count and HPC were both significantly higher in spray water than in tap water, and the difference was particularly apparent for HPC, with an increase of around 2–3 log10 (P < 0.01). Detection rates were also higher in spray water than in tap water (P < 0.01). Significant differences in total viable count were not observed between male and female restrooms (Table 2) or between the research and outpatient buildings (data not shown).

Table 2

Total viable count (TVC) and heterotrophic plate count (HPC) of tap water and spray water from warm-water bidet toilet seats

  Spray water
Tap water
nGM(GSD)Positive numberDetection ratio (%)nGM(GSD)Positive numberDetection ratio (%)
TVC (CFU/mL) Total 127 5.7 (9.2) 71 55.9 103 1.2 (2.2) 18 17.5 
Male 43 4.8 (8.9) 23 53.5 40 1.3 (2.9) 17.5 
Female 71 6.4 (9.7) 42 59.2 50 1.1 (1.7) 18.0 
Barrier-Free 13 5.2 (11.7) 46.2 13 1.2 (1.7) 15.4 
HPC (CFU/mL) Total 127 18,000 (12.1) 127 100 103 22 (13.3) 103 100 
Male 43 7,300 (7.0) 43 100 40 15 (12.0) 40 100 
Female 71 33,200 (13.0) 71 100 50 28 (13.7) 50 100 
Barrier-Free 13 12,800 (13.6) 13 100 13 32 (17.8) 13 100 
  Spray water
Tap water
nGM(GSD)Positive numberDetection ratio (%)nGM(GSD)Positive numberDetection ratio (%)
TVC (CFU/mL) Total 127 5.7 (9.2) 71 55.9 103 1.2 (2.2) 18 17.5 
Male 43 4.8 (8.9) 23 53.5 40 1.3 (2.9) 17.5 
Female 71 6.4 (9.7) 42 59.2 50 1.1 (1.7) 18.0 
Barrier-Free 13 5.2 (11.7) 46.2 13 1.2 (1.7) 15.4 
HPC (CFU/mL) Total 127 18,000 (12.1) 127 100 103 22 (13.3) 103 100 
Male 43 7,300 (7.0) 43 100 40 15 (12.0) 40 100 
Female 71 33,200 (13.0) 71 100 50 28 (13.7) 50 100 
Barrier-Free 13 12,800 (13.6) 13 100 13 32 (17.8) 13 100 

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal