Research & Evidence

What the published research
on probiotic sanitation has found.

Research on Bacillus-based probiotic environmental sanitation — the same category of approach E-Biotic Home uses — has been published in peer-reviewed journals for over a decade, mostly from hospitals, where surfaces are sampled constantly and outcomes are tracked. These studies did not test E-Biotic Home or our HVAC-delivered system; they are listed here so you can read what independent researchers measured. Direct studies come first; reviews that summarise other work are kept separate.

Direct studies · Featured results

Three studies with the clearest measured results.

  1. 1Clinical study · 2018

    83% average reduction in surface pathogens.

    Six hospitals, 11,842 patients, 24,875 environmental samples. Probiotic-based sanitation was associated with a mean 83% decrease in surface pathogens (range 70–96.3%), and healthcare-associated infection incidence fell from 4.8% to 2.3%.

    Caselli E, et al. · PLOS ONE — Reducing healthcare-associated infections incidence by a probiotic-based sanitation system: A multicentre, prospective, intervention study

    PLOS ONE 13(7): e0199616 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0199616

    View Study
  2. 2Clinical study · 2019

    Up to 99% reduction in antimicrobial-resistance genes.

    Five hospitals, six months per sanitation type. Probiotic sanitation was associated with up to a 99% decrease in resistance genes in surface microbiota and a 33–100% decrease in resistant strains depending on the antibiotic; antimicrobial drug use tied to infections fell 60.3%.

    Caselli E, et al. · Infection and Drug Resistance — Impact of a probiotic-based hospital sanitation on antimicrobial resistance and HAI-associated antimicrobial consumption and costs: a multicenter study

    Infect Drug Resist 12: 501–510 · doi:10.2147/IDR.S194670

    View Study
  3. 3Laboratory study · 2023

    More than 97.7% prevention of dry biofilm formation in laboratory testing.

    A Bacillus-based probiotic cleanser prevented over 97.7% of dry biofilm formation by E. coli and S. aureus across steel, ceramic and melamine surfaces. Microscopy showed the probiotic bacteria germinating and colonising the surfaces, likely forming a protective layer.

    Wormald R, et al. · MicrobiologyOpen — Bacillus-based probiotic cleansers reduce the formation of dry biofilms on common hospital surfaces

    MicrobiologyOpen 12(6): e1391 · doi:10.1002/mbo3.1391

    View Study

Direct studies · Clinical and laboratory

More measured results.

  • Clinical study · PLOS ONE · 2016

    Probiotic Bacillus remained active on dry indoor surfaces.

    Bacillus spores germinated on treated surfaces, competed with and displaced pathogens, and did not select for resistant species — the procedure instead produced an evident decrease in antibiotic-resistance genes in the surface population.

    Caselli E, et al. — Impact of a Probiotic-Based Cleaning Intervention on the Microbiota Ecosystem of the Hospital Surfaces: Focus on the Resistome Remodulation

    PLOS ONE 11(2): e0148857 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0148857

    View Study
  • Laboratory study · Microorganisms · 2020

    Probiotic cleaning demonstrated competitive exclusion of pathogens.

    An eight-month trial compared a Bacillus probiotic cleaner, disinfectant, plain soap and water on ceramic, linoleum and stainless steel. Probiotic and soap regimes fostered competitive exclusion of E. coli and S. aureus far more effectively than disinfectant; P. aeruginosa biofilm competition was also tested.

    Stone W, et al. — Disinfectant, Soap or Probiotic Cleaning? Surface Microbiome Diversity and Biofilm Competitive Exclusion

    Microorganisms 8(11): 1726

    View Study
  • Clinical study · Journal of Hospital Infection · 2026

    28% lower healthcare-associated infection rate during probiotic cleaning.

    5,753 hospitalisations over two consecutive 12-month periods. Infection incidence was 3.61 vs 5.01 episodes per 1,000 patient-days during the probiotic period — about a 28% lower crude rate. The authors note the study was not randomised, so cause cannot be concluded.

    Racodon M, et al. — Association Between a Probiotic-Based Cleaning Strategy and Healthcare-Associated Infection Incidence: A Hospital-Based Quasi-Experimental Study

    J Hosp Infect (2026) · doi:10.1016/j.jhin.2026.08.007

    View Study

Reviews · Summaries of other studies

What expert reviews conclude.

A review summarises other people’s studies rather than reporting a new measurement, so these two are listed apart from the direct studies above.

  • Review · Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control · 2024

    Experts find probiotic cleaning comparable to conventional disinfectants in major clinical testing.

    Infection-control researchers from five European countries summarised the evidence to June 2023: probiotic cleaning was similarly effective at reducing infection-related pathogens in environmental samples, and non-inferior to disinfectants for preventing infections in a large randomised trial. They stress that more standardisation and research are needed.

    Denkel LA, et al. — Can probiotics trigger a paradigm shift for cleaning healthcare environments? A narrative review

    Antimicrob Resist Infect Control 13: 119 · doi:10.1186/s13756-024-01474-6

    View Study
  • Review · Biology (MDPI) · 2025

    16 studies reviewed; all reported numerically lower pathogen counts or infections.

    A comprehensive review of 16 studies — 13 in clinical settings and 3 on experimental surfaces. All showed numerically lower pathogen counts and/or fewer infections with probiotic-based cleaning than with disinfectants and detergents; three reported lower resistance genes. The authors call for further long-term research.

    Falagas ME, et al. — Probiotic-Based Cleaning Solutions: From Research Hypothesis to Infection Control Applications

    Biology 14(8): 1043 · doi:10.3390/biology14081043

    View Study

How to read this

These are independent studies of Bacillus-based probiotic sanitation, almost all in hospitals. They are not tests of E-Biotic Home or of delivering probiotics through a home’s HVAC. Our own in-home and lab results are on the homepage. EPA registration under FIFRA (No. 94339-1) is not an EPA endorsement, and nothing here is a claim to treat, cure or prevent any illness, allergy or asthma condition.

Book Your Free In-Home Assessment