Antimicrobial Resistance, the Built Environment, and Why Material Design Matters
Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is frequently described as a “silent pandemic.” Unlike acute outbreaks, it advances gradually, driven by evolutionary biology and human behaviour. Resistant infections are harder to treat, increase healthcare costs, prolong hospital stays, and elevate mortality risk.
The scale of the issue is substantial. A landmark global analysis published in The Lancet in 2022 estimated that bacterial AMR was directly responsible for approximately 1.27 million deaths in 2019, with nearly 5 million deaths associated with resistant infections worldwide. These figures place AMR among the leading causes of death globally.
Public discourse typically focuses on antibiotic prescribing, drug development pipelines, and agricultural use. These are critical drivers. However, once resistant organisms emerge, transmission dynamics become equally important. Resistant bacteria do not remain isolated; they circulate through healthcare systems and communities.
This is where the built environment enters the conversation.
Hospitals, care facilities, transport systems, and other high-density environments are not inert spaces. They are ecological systems in which microorganisms interact with materials, people, moisture, airflow, and cleaning regimes. Materials do not create antimicrobial resistance. Yet they may influence how long resistant organisms persist and how easily they transfer between hosts.
Understanding that distinction is essential for informed discussion.
What antimicrobial resistance is… and is not
Antimicrobial resistance occurs when microorganisms evolve the ability to survive exposure to antimicrobial agents that would normally inhibit or kill them. The World Health Organization classifies AMR as one of the top ten global public health threats.
Resistance develops primarily through selective pressure. When antibiotics are used, susceptible bacteria are eliminated, while those with survival advantages persist and multiply. Overuse, inappropriate prescribing, incomplete treatment courses, and agricultural application accelerate this process.
Resistance is therefore an evolutionary biological phenomenon. It does not arise from surfaces, buildings, or materials themselves.
However, once resistant strains such as MRSA (methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus), VRE (vancomycin-resistant Enterococci), or certain carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative organisms exist, preventing their spread becomes a core objective of infection control policy.
The UK Health Security Agency and other national agencies emphasise a multi-layered strategy combining stewardship, surveillance, diagnostics, and infection prevention. Environmental hygiene is embedded within these frameworks.
Transmission: the under-examined dimension of AMR
AMR discussions often concentrate on how resistance emerges, but transmission is the mechanism by which resistant organisms become a systemic burden.
Healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) remain a major challenge globally. The European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) estimates that approximately 3.5 million patients acquire a healthcare-associated infection in EU/EEA countries each year. A significant proportion involve antimicrobial-resistant organisms.
Transmission pathways are multifactorial. Contaminated hands, shared equipment, airborne particles, and environmental surfaces can all play roles. Numerous peer-reviewed studies have shown that certain bacteria can survive on inanimate surfaces for extended periods. A widely cited review in Clinical Microbiology Reviews reported survival times ranging from days to several months depending on species and conditions.
Persistence does not equate to infection, but it increases opportunity. If a resistant organism remains viable on a high-touch surface between cleaning cycles, it can be transferred to hands, gloves, or equipment and subsequently to another patient.
Surfaces do not generate resistance, but they can function as intermediate reservoirs within transmission chains.
Microbial persistence and material characteristics
The interaction between microorganisms and materials is influenced by surface physics and chemistry.
Surface roughness at the microscopic level can protect bacteria from mechanical removal. Even materials that appear smooth may contain micro-topographies that facilitate adhesion. Over time, repeated abrasion and chemical disinfection can increase surface irregularity, potentially reducing cleanability.
Moisture retention is another significant factor. Many bacteria survive longer under moist conditions. Materials that trap or retain moisture, whether textiles, polymers, or composites, may extend survival windows in certain contexts.
Surface chemistry also affects microbial adhesion. Hydrophobicity, surface charge, and energy states influence how easily organisms attach and detach. Once attached, bacteria can produce extracellular polymeric substances, forming biofilms that enhance resistance to mechanical and chemical removal.
Biofilms are particularly relevant in clinical settings. They create structured microbial communities that are more tolerant of environmental stressors and disinfectants. While biofilm formation on medical devices is widely studied, environmental biofilms in built spaces are receiving increasing attention.
These material-level factors do not determine infection outcomes independently. They operate within broader systems involving human contact patterns, ventilation, cleaning protocols, and clinical practice. Nonetheless, they contribute to the ecological conditions that shape microbial behaviour.
Cleaning and disinfection: indispensable but episodic
Environmental cleaning remains a cornerstone of infection prevention. Disinfection protocols in healthcare environments are evidence-based and strictly regulated. However, cleaning is inherently episodic. It occurs at defined intervals, whereas contamination events are continuous.
In high-traffic environments, surfaces may be touched repeatedly between scheduled cleaning cycles. During this period, microorganisms can be deposited and potentially transferred onward. Even in facilities with exemplary hygiene standards, the interval between contamination and removal cannot be eliminated entirely.
Recognising this dynamic has led to interest in complementary strategies that function passively between cleaning events. These strategies are not substitutes for cleaning but may reduce microbial survival during the intervals in which recontamination occurs.
Built-in antimicrobial technologies in a layered strategy
Engineered antimicrobial materials incorporate functional agents during manufacture to inhibit microbial survival on treated surfaces. Unlike topical coatings, these technologies are integrated into the material matrix.
It is essential to frame their role accurately. They do not treat infections, do not replace antibiotics, and do not eliminate antimicrobial resistance. Rather, they may contribute to reducing microbial load on certain high-touch surfaces between routine cleaning cycles.
Infection prevention increasingly adopts a “Swiss cheese” model of layered defence. No single intervention is decisive. Instead, multiple partial barriers combine to reduce overall risk. Ventilation, hand hygiene, cleaning, stewardship, and surveillance each play roles. Material-level technologies may be positioned within this layered framework.
Appropriate implementation depends on context, evidence, regulatory compliance, and realistic performance expectations.
Do antimicrobial materials contribute to resistance?
This is a critical and legitimate question.
Resistance development is influenced by exposure intensity, concentration, mechanism of action, and ecological context. Some antimicrobial mechanisms target multiple cellular processes, potentially reducing the likelihood of resistance compared to single-target antibiotics. However, any intervention that exerts selective pressure requires careful assessment.
Regulatory systems exist in many regions to evaluate antimicrobial claims and mechanisms. Stewardship principles emphasise proportionate, evidence-based application rather than indiscriminate use.
The scientific literature on resistance development in relation to surface-level antimicrobial technologies remains an active area of research. Balanced discussion requires acknowledging both potential benefits and theoretical risks.
Overstated claims can undermine credibility. Equally, dismissing environmental factors entirely overlooks a component of transmission risk.
AMR as a systems challenge
Global AMR action plans emphasise integrated responses. The WHO Global Action Plan on AMR outlines objectives including improving awareness, strengthening surveillance, reducing infection incidence, optimising antimicrobial use, and ensuring sustainable investment in countermeasures.
Environmental design intersects most directly with the objective of reducing infection incidence. By lowering opportunities for transmission, healthcare systems may reduce the burden that drives antimicrobial consumption.
Built environments extend beyond hospitals. Care homes house vulnerable populations. Public transport systems facilitate high-density contact. Food production facilities manage contamination risk within regulatory frameworks. In each case, material performance can influence hygiene management strategies.
Sustainability, durability and long-term performance
Another emerging consideration is sustainability. Repeated high-intensity cleaning cycles consume water, energy, and chemicals. Materials that degrade rapidly under disinfection stress may require frequent replacement, generating waste and embodied carbon costs.
Designing materials that maintain integrity under repeated sanitation may support both infection control and environmental objectives. Durability is therefore not solely an economic factor but also a resilience consideration.
In this sense, material innovation intersects with both AMR strategy and sustainability strategy.
Looking ahead: microbiology and architecture
The built environment microbiome is becoming a recognised field of study. Researchers are mapping microbial communities in hospitals, offices, and public spaces to better understand ecological dynamics. As this research matures, material design decisions may increasingly be informed by microbiological data.
Architecture, materials science, and microbiology are converging disciplines. Designing environments with microbial behaviour in mind does not imply sterility or eradication. Rather, it reflects an understanding that humans coexist with complex microbial ecosystems.
Antimicrobial resistance will not be solved by a single technological advance. It requires stewardship, policy coordination, pharmaceutical innovation, behavioural change, and environmental design working together.
The built environment does not create AMR. But it can be designed with greater awareness of how resistant organisms behave within it.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
-
Antimicrobial resistance occurs when bacteria and other microorganisms evolve the ability to survive medicines that would normally kill them. This makes infections harder to treat and increases the risk of complications.
-
No. Surfaces do not cause resistance to develop. Resistance arises primarily due to antimicrobial use and evolutionary pressure. However, contaminated surfaces can contribute to the spread of already resistant organisms.
-
No. Antimicrobial materials are not substitutes for cleaning and disinfection. They may act as complementary measures that help reduce microbial survival between routine cleaning cycles.
-
This depends on the mechanism of action, concentration, and context of use. Responsible implementation and regulatory oversight are essential. The scientific community continues to study resistance dynamics related to antimicrobial technologies.
-
Once resistant organisms are present, preventing their transmission becomes critical. Surfaces, equipment, and materials can act as intermediate reservoirs within transmission chains, particularly in high-touch or high-risk environments.
Further Reading and Authoritative Sources
World Health Organization – Antimicrobial Resistance Fact Sheets
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/antimicrobial-resistanceWHO Global Action Plan on Antimicrobial Resistance
https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241509763UK Health Security Agency – UK 5-Year Action Plan for AMR
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-5-year-action-plan-for-antimicrobial-resistance-2019-to-2024The Lancet (2022) – Global burden of bacterial antimicrobial resistance
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)02724-0/fulltextEuropean Centre for Disease Prevention and Control – Healthcare-associated infections
https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/healthcare-associated-infections
