In this study, we looked into the amount of bacteria that were present in the collected sample. This study discovered that bacteria and fungi were present across the entire sample drawn from a variety of sources, according to our findings. Our findings demonstrate that all samples harbored bacterial contamination, emphasizing the ubiquity of microbes on frequently exchanged items, such as currency notes. This observation corroborates previous studies that have highlighted the potential role of paper currency in the transmission of pathogens [6, 7, 26–29]. Gram-positive bacteria were the most prevalent microbial isolate in our samples, possibly indicating their greater ability to survive on paper currency or a higher rate of contamination from common sources. This finding has important public health implications, as some gram-positive bacteria, including Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pyogenes, are known to cause serious infections [30–33]. Although gram-negative bacteria, mold, and yeast were present at lower concentrations, they should not be disregarded, as these microorganisms can also cause infections, particularly in individuals with weakened immune systems [34, 35]. Similar kind of finding in South Africa explore the contamination of banknotes and other surfaces with microorganisms [36]. Similarly, research from Jimma Town in Ethiopia indicates that paper money may act as a vehicle for the spread of pathogenic microbes [22]. Therefore, our study suggests that poor handling practices and personal hygiene of food vendors could contribute to these microbial counts.
In this study, we employed microscopic, biochemical, and phenotypic characterization methods to identify and assess the prevalence of bacterial and fungal species in samples from various sources. Our results, as shown in Tables 2 and 3, revealed the presence of a diverse range of microorganisms, including klebissesla spp., Streptococcus spp., Bacillus spp., E. coli, spp., Staphylococcus aureus., Aspergillus spp., and yeast, across the sampled codes (001, 002, 005, 006, and 008). The microbial diversity observed in our samples underscores the potential public health implications of bacterial and fungal contamination. Notably, we identified gram-positive (Streptococcus spp., Bacillus spp., and Staphylococcus aureus) and gram-negative (Klebsiella spp and E. coli) bacteria, as well as mold (Aspergillus spp.) and yeast. This diverse array of microorganisms is consistent with previous studies reporting the presence of various bacterial and fungal species in environmental samples [37–40].
The prevalence of specific bacterial and fungal species varied across the samples. Among the 200 isolated bacterial colonies, Staphylococcus aureus predominated (35%), followed by Streptococcus spp (30%), Bacillus spp. (25%), and Enterobacteriaceae spp (10%). As for the 50 isolated fungal colonies, Aspergillus spp. accounted for 40%, while yeast accounted for 60%. The variation in prevalence across samples could be attributed to factors such as differences in environmental conditions, handling practices, or potential cross-contamination during sample collection and processing. Several of the identified microorganisms are known to have clinical and public health significance. For instance, Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus spp., and Enterobacteriaceae spp. have been implicated in various human infections [41, 42]. Moreover, the presence of Aspergillus spp. and yeast may pose health risks, particularly for individuals with weakened immune systems or underlying respiratory conditions [35].
In the study regarding the antibiotics susceptibility test, we investigated the antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus spp., Klebissela spp and E. coli. isolated from various samples. Our results, presented in Tables 4 and 5, demonstrate diverse patterns of sensitivity and resistance to the tested antibiotics. For Staphylococcus aureus and streptococcus spp., our findings indicate high sensitivity towards certain antibiotics, such as Vancomycine and Tetracycline, suggesting that these may be effective treatment options for infections caused by these bacterial species. Conversely, Ampicillin exhibited relatively poor performance against these isolates, which may necessitate the consideration of alternative treatment options or further resistance testing when dealing with infections caused by Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus spp. A similar investigation was conducted in Nepal and Ghana, where it was found that all Staphylococcus aureus isolate were resistant to Ampicillin. However, it was observed that all strains were sensitive to vancomycin [43, 44]. Similarly, study done in japan also demonstrate that Tetracyclines have emerged as a second choice of antibiotics to beta-lactams for the management of mastitis in dairy herds which is caused by Gram-positive bacteria [45, 46].
Klebsiella spp. demonstrated higher sensitivity towards Ciprofloxacin, but showed a notably higher resistance rate (55%) to Cotrimoxazole, and Ampicillin. Zakia and his collegue also made a similar finding. They discovered that antimicrobial agents such as Ciprofloxacin and Gentamycin retained their antimicrobial activities against both strains of E. coli (ZK9, ZK40, and ZK60) and K. pneumoniae (ZK32 and ZK89). On the other hand, studies conducted in Gahana have shown that commonly recovered bacterial enterobacteriace isolates, such as E. coli, Salmonella spp, klebissela spp have a high resistance to co-trimoxazole, and Gentamycin [44].This finding raises concerns about the use of Cotrimoxazole and Gentamycin as an empirical treatment option for infections caused by E. coli, Salmonella spp, klebissela spp and emphasizes the importance of understanding the local antimicrobial resistance patterns when selecting appropriate treatment. Our findings underscore the significance of antibiotic stewardship in the face of growing antimicrobial resistance. The appropriate selection and use of antibiotics are crucial to minimizing the development of resistance and preserving the effectiveness of available treatments.
In this study, we evaluated how aware the public is about the transmission of diseases through paper currency and the precautions they take after handling money. Our findings indicate that a significant majority of participants (79.8%) are aware of the potential risks associated with handling paper currency, while 20.2% are not. This suggests that, although many people recognize the possibility of disease transmission through paper currency, there is still a need for targeted education and awareness campaigns to reach those who are uninformed. While there have been no previous studies specifically focusing on the storage of paper currency and disease transmission, research on other objects, such as doorknobs and handrails, has demonstrated that contaminated surfaces can contribute to the spread of diseases [47–49]. Given that paper currency can also serve as a potential vector for disease transmission, it is crucial to raise awareness about safe storage practices.
Our study discovered that a notable percentage of participants (53.9%) do not take any precautions after handling paper currency. In contrast, 36% of participants wash their hands and 10.1% utilize hand sanitizer. This discrepancy in adhering to proper hand hygiene practices is worrisome, considering that hand hygiene is widely recognized as a crucial preventive measure against infection transmission [50, 51]. Several studies [52–54] have emphasized the importance of hand washing or the use of hand sanitizers in reducing the transmission of diseases in various settings. However, limited research has specifically focused on hand hygiene practices after handling paper currency. Our findings suggest that public health campaigns should highlight the importance of hand hygiene, particularly in the context of handling money, to minimize potential health risks.
Our study examined participants' interest in digital payments as a safer alternative to paper currency, as well as their opinions on including information about disease transmission through paper currency in public health campaigns. A significant number of participants (44.9%) strongly agreed with the use of digital payments as a lower-risk alternative, while 42.7% agreed. Only 11.2% were neutral, and a mere 1.1% strongly disagreed. This high level of interest in digital payments can be attributed to the increasing global trend of adopting cashless payment methods, as pointed out by Rahul, Gardner, and their colleagues [55, 56], who emphasized the potential benefits of digital payments in terms of convenience, security, and reduced health risks. Our findings suggest that promoting digital payments could be an effective strategy for minimizing the potential disease transmission associated with handling paper currency.
A significant majority of participants (47.2% agree and 37.1% strongly agree) in our study emphasized the importance of including information on disease transmission through paper currency in public health campaigns. This finding is consistent with previous research that has highlighted the critical role of health communication in raising public awareness about disease prevention [57, 58]. While there may be limited studies specifically addressing the inclusion of information on disease transmission through paper currency in public health campaigns, our findings suggest that such initiatives would be well-received by the public. The strong support expressed by participants indicates a demand for more targeted and comprehensive health communication strategies that address various aspects of disease prevention, including those related to the handling of paper currency.
Our study revealed that a significant portion of participants (34.8%) do not store their paper currency separately from other items, while 28.1% do store them separately, and 27% sometimes store them separately. This finding is concerning, as it suggests that many individuals may not be following optimal practices to minimize the potential for cross-contamination between paper currency and other items. Although there may be limited research specifically addressing the storage of paper currency separately from other items, our findings can be contextualized within the broader literature on hygiene practices and disease transmission. Research has consistently shown that maintaining cleanliness and separating potentially contaminated items can reduce the risk of spreading diseases [59].
Our study showed that a significant percentage of participants (38.2%) take several precautions to prevent their paper currency from getting wet, crumpled, or damaged, while others take some precautions (27%) or occasionally take precautions (19.1%). However, 15.7% do not take any precautions, suggesting that a portion of the population may not be aware of or concerned about the potential risks associated with damaged or deteriorated paper currency. In line with the above sentence, Studies have shown that individuals' awareness of potential risks and their perception of the severity of these risks influence their likelihood of adopting preventive measures [60]. In this context, the lack of precautions taken by some participants might indicate a need for targeted education and awareness campaigns. Such initiatives should emphasize the potential risks associated with damaged or deteriorated paper currency, such as the increased likelihood of transmitting diseases, and promote the adoption of preventive measures to minimize these risks.
Our study revealed that 41.6% of participants have experienced issues with their paper currency, such as unpleasant odors or visible mold, which could be related to improper storage conditions. Additionally, 24.7% have experienced minor issues, while 19.1% have not encountered such problems, and 14.6% were unsure. These findings suggest that a significant proportion of people have encountered problems related to the storage of paper currency, which could indicate a need for better education on proper storage methods. Research has consistently shown that maintaining cleanliness and proper storage of various items can reduce the risk of spreading diseases and prevent spoilage or damage [59, 61]. In light of this evidence, the issues encountered by participants in our study might indicate a need for targeted education and awareness campaigns. Such initiatives should emphasize the importance of proper paper currency storage to prevent potential health risks and maintain the integrity of the currency.
Our study found that most participants (50.6%) consider proper storage of paper currency very important for preventing disease transmission. However, small percentages (2.2%) do not believe in its importance, and another 2.2% consider it less important, with 5.6% remaining neutral. These findings suggest that while a majority of people recognize the importance of proper paper currency storage in disease prevention, there are still some who do not see it as a priority. Research on health beliefs and attitudes has shown that individuals' perceptions of the importance of various health-related behaviors can significantly influence their adherence to recommended practices [62, 63]. In the context of our study, the varying perceptions of the importance of proper paper currency storage could be explained by differences in individuals' health beliefs and attitudes. In addition, resource variables, such as education level, personal health status, and social support, play moderating roles in perceptions of the importance of proper paper currency storage.
Our study found that 64% of participants stored paper bills in pockets, 20.2% used purses, 9% used wallets, and 6.7% used other storage methods. The predominant use of pockets for storing paper currency raises concerns about the potential for microbial contamination and disease transmission, as pockets may not provide a clean and protective environment for storing currency. Previous studies have shown that various surfaces and items, including money, can harbor microorganisms, including fungi, viruses and protozoa [64–66]. The transfer of these microorganisms can occur when people touch contaminated surfaces and then touch their face, increasing the risk of infection [67]. In the context of our study, storing paper currency in pockets might increase the likelihood of contamination, as pockets can be exposed to various environmental factors and may not be regularly cleaned. Therefore, it is essential to consider alternative storage methods that provide better protection and minimize the risk of microbial transmission. Although there might be limited research specifically addressing the hygiene aspects of different paper currency storage methods, our findings suggest that promoting the use of cleaner and more protective storage options, such as wallets or purses, could contribute to better hygiene practices and reduce the potential for disease transmission.
Our study revealed that 40.4% of participants rarely cleaned or disinfected the storage place for their paper currency, while 36% did so occasionally, 15.7% often, and 7.9% very often. This suggests that a significant proportion of participants do not frequently clean or disinfect the areas where they store their paper currency, which could potentially create an environment conducive to microbial growth. Existing research emphasizes the importance of regular cleaning and disinfection of surfaces to minimize microbial contamination and reduce the risk of disease transmission [68, 69]. Inadequate cleaning of surfaces can allow for the accumulation of microorganisms, some of which may be potentially harmful to human health. Our findings suggest that promoting more frequent cleaning and disinfection of these areas could contribute to better hygiene and lower the risk of microbial growth. Participants who rarely or occasionally clean their paper currency storage areas may benefit from targeted education on the importance of regular cleaning practices to maintain a cleaner and safer environment for storing their money.
Our study found that 36% of participants were aware of the potential for microorganism growth from storing paper currency, 28.1% were somewhat aware, 12.4% were unsure, and 2.2% were not aware. These findings suggest that while a significant proportion of participants have some awareness of the potential risks, there is still a need for further education and awareness campaigns to improve understanding and promote better paper currency storage practices. Existing research emphasizes the importance of public awareness and knowledge in promoting positive health behaviors [70, 71]. Knowledge about potential health risks, such as microbial growth on paper currency, can encourage individuals to adopt preventive measures to protect their health and the health of others. Our findings suggest that targeted education campaigns could improve awareness and encourage better storage practices. By providing clear information about the potential risks and preventive measures, these campaigns could help individuals make more informed decisions about how they store and handle paper currency.